Quality, Teaching and Research Unit, Hospital de Manacor, Manacor, Spain.
Health Care Office, Balearic Islands Health Service, Palma, Spain.
BMJ Open. 2018 Oct 21;8(10):e021040. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021040.
Catheter-related bloodstream infections are one of the most important adverse events for patients. Evidence-based practice embraces interventions to prevent and reduce catheter-related bloodstream infections in patients. At present, a growing number of guidelines exist worldwide. The purpose of the study was to assess clinical practice guidelines for peripheral and central venous access device care and prevention of related complications.
Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines: We conducted a search of the literature published from 2005 to 2018 using Medline/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Ovid, ScienceDirect, Scopus and Web of Science. We also evaluated grey literature sources and websites of organisations that compiled or produced guidelines. Guideline quality was assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, Second Edition tool by three independent reviewers. Cohen's kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the concordance between reviewers.
We included seven guidelines in the evaluation. The concordance between observers was substantial, K=0.6364 (95% CI 0.0247 to 1.2259). We identified seven international guidelines, which scored poorly on crucial domains such as applicability (medium 39%), stakeholder involvement (medium 65%) and methodological rigour (medium 67%). Guidelines by Spanish Health Ministry and UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence presented the highest quality.
It is crucial to critically evaluate the validity and reliability of clinical practice guidelines so the best, most context-specific document is selected. Such choice is a necessary prior step to encourage and support health organisations to transfer research results to clinical practice. The gaps identified in our study may explain the suboptimal clinical impact of guidelines. Such low adoption may be mitigated with the use of implementation guides accompanying clinical documents.
导管相关血流感染是患者最重要的不良事件之一。循证实践包括预防和减少患者导管相关血流感染的干预措施。目前,全球范围内有越来越多的指南存在。本研究旨在评估外周和中心静脉置管护理及预防相关并发症的临床实践指南。
临床实践指南的系统评价:我们使用 Medline/PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Ovid、ScienceDirect、Scopus 和 Web of Science 搜索了 2005 年至 2018 年发表的文献。我们还评估了灰色文献来源和编制或制作指南的组织网站。三位独立评审员使用评估研究和评价指南,第二版工具评估指南质量。使用 Cohen's kappa 系数评估评审员之间的一致性。
我们共纳入了 7 项指南进行评估。观察者之间的一致性较高,K=0.6364(95%置信区间 0.0247 至 1.2259)。我们确定了 7 项国际指南,这些指南在适用性(中等 39%)、利益相关者参与(中等 65%)和方法严谨性(中等 67%)等关键领域得分较低。西班牙卫生部和英国国家卫生与保健卓越研究所的指南质量最高。
批判性评估临床实践指南的有效性和可靠性至关重要,以便选择最佳、最具针对性的文件。这种选择是鼓励和支持卫生组织将研究结果转化为临床实践的必要前提步骤。我们研究中发现的差距可能解释了指南的临床效果不佳。通过使用伴随临床文件的实施指南,可以减轻这种低采用率。