Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health-San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Feb;141:110504. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2020.110504. Epub 2020 Nov 17.
Several guidelines and consensus statements have been produced and disseminated for the detection and management of newborn hearing loss. However, to date, the quality and methodologic rigor of these screening and management protocols have not been appraised.
To identify and evaluate existing guidelines and consensus statements for the detection and management of neonatal hearing loss.
A comprehensive search of EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS and grey literature sources was conducted until August 2020. The quality of these guidelines was assessed by four independent reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition (AGREE II). Domain scores were considered satisfactory quality if they scored >60%, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess agreement among the appraisers.
Twelve guidelines were assessed for critical evaluation. Only two guidelines were classified as 'high quality', and the remaining were 'average' or 'low quality'. The 'Scope and Purpose' domain achieved the highest mean score (91.3% ± 5.8%), and lowest was 'Rigor of Development' (35.8% ± 19.1%). ICC analysis showed good to very good agreement across all domains (0.63-0.95).
These findings highlight the variability in methodologic quality of guidelines and consensus statement for the detection and management of neonatal hearing loss. These results may help to improve the reporting of future guidelines and guide the selection and use of these guidelines in clinical practice.
已经制定并传播了一些指南和共识声明，用于检测和管理新生儿听力损失。然而，迄今为止，这些筛选和管理方案的质量和方法严谨性尚未得到评估。
确定和评估现有的新生儿听力损失检测和管理指南和共识声明。
对 EMBASE、MEDLINE/PubMed、SCOPUS 和灰色文献来源进行了全面搜索，截至 2020 年 8 月。四名独立评审员使用评估研究和评估指南的 Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation，第 2 版（AGREE II）对这些指南的质量进行了评估。如果评分>60%，则认为该领域的评分具有良好的质量，并且计算了组内相关系数（ICC），以评估评估员之间的一致性。
对 12 项指南进行了关键评估。只有两项指南被归类为“高质量”，其余的则是“平均”或“低质量”。“范围和目的”领域的平均得分最高（91.3%±5.8%），而最低的是“开发严谨性”（35.8%±19.1%）。ICC 分析表明，所有领域的一致性均为良好至非常好（0.63-0.95）。
这些发现突出了检测和管理新生儿听力损失的指南和共识声明在方法学质量上的差异。这些结果可能有助于提高未来指南的报告质量，并指导在临床实践中选择和使用这些指南。
