Division of Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom,
Department of Upper Gastro-Intestinal Surgery, Luton and Dunstable University Hospitals NHS Trust, Luton, United Kingdom.
Dig Surg. 2021;38(3):177-185. doi: 10.1159/000514446. Epub 2021 Mar 23.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth leading cause of death with 1.4 million new cases occurring annually worldwide. High-quality clinical practice guidelines are needed to tailor high-quality individualized treatment. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the methodological quality of the current guidelines for the management of acute malignant left-sided colonic bowel obstruction.
A systematic search of the literature was carried out using electronic databases. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument was used to assess the quality of each guideline.
Search results returned a total of 14 guidelines appropriate for assessment. Both domain I (scope and purpose) and domain VI (editorial independence) were assessed with the same median score of 83%. The lowest scoring domain was domain V (applicability), scoring only 43%. The 2 guidelines that had the highest score were the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), each scoring 100%. However, there were significant variations in terms of quality. The NICE and New Zealand guidelines were voted unanimously for use unchanged, whilst 8 other guidelines were voted for use with modifications.
Variation in guideline quality in CRC is a concern despite some clearly excellent published guidelines. All guidelines score poorly when it comes to describing how the guidelines could be applied. Lack of patient participation in guideline development is also a shortcoming that requires urgent redress.
结直肠癌(CRC)是全球第四大致死原因,每年有 140 万新发病例。需要高质量的临床实践指南来制定高质量的个体化治疗方案。本研究旨在评估当前急性恶性左侧结肠肠梗阻管理指南的方法学质量。
使用电子数据库进行系统文献检索。使用评估指南研究和评估(AGREE II)工具评估每条指南的质量。
搜索结果共返回了 14 条适合评估的指南。领域 I(范围和目的)和领域 VI(编辑独立性)的评估中位数均为 83%。评分最低的领域是领域 V(适用性),仅得 43%。评分最高的 2 条指南是国家卫生与保健卓越研究所(NICE)和苏格兰校际指南网络(SIGN),评分均为 100%。然而,质量方面存在显著差异。NICE 和新西兰指南一致投票决定不变地使用,而其他 8 条指南则投票决定修改后使用。
尽管有一些明显优秀的已发表指南,但 CRC 指南的质量存在差异令人担忧。所有指南在描述如何应用指南方面得分都很低。指南制定过程中缺乏患者参与也是一个需要紧急纠正的缺点。