State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Cancer Research Institute, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Clin Respir J. 2021 Sep;15(9):983-991. doi: 10.1111/crj.13402. Epub 2021 Jun 13.
After the low quality of Chinese clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for respiratory diseases published from 1979 to 2013 was reported, some handbooks were published to standardize guidelines' development recently. There was a great increase in the production and dissemination of CPGs annually in China, whose quality and potential impact were unknown.
A systematic search of four literature databases was performed for the period January 2013 to December 2018 to identify Chinese CPGs for respiratory diseases. Eligible CPGs were evaluated using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.
A total of 197 CPGs were identified for review. Compared with the result of previous study, the increased scores of the six AGREE II domains were screened: Scope and purpose (57.3% vs. 57.8%), Stakeholder involvement (17.6% vs. 25.0%), Rigor of development (10.2% vs. 13.2%), Clarity and presentation (55.2% vs. 58.4%), Applicability (9.3% vs. 25.9%), and Editorial independence (1.1% vs. 6.3%). The improved overall assessment for included CPGs were: Recommended (4, 2.0% vs. 0, 0%) and Recommended with modifications (26, 13.2% vs. 3, 2.8%). The improved level of evidence used to make recommendations were 59, 11.9% versus 168, 22.4% and 88, 17.7% versus 195, 26.0%, A and B, respectively.
The overall quality of CPGs for respiratory diseases published from 2013 to 2018 in China was slightly improved, but had a big gap with the optimum level, especially in Rigor of development and Editorial independence. Increased efforts are required to enable the development of high-quality evidence-based CPGs for respiratory diseases.
自 1979 年至 2013 年发表的中国呼吸疾病临床实践指南（CPG）质量较低后，近期发布了一些手册来规范指南的制定。中国每年 CPG 的制作和传播数量都有大幅增加，但 CPG 的质量和潜在影响尚不清楚。
系统检索了 2013 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月期间四个文献数据库，以确定中国呼吸疾病 CPG。使用评估指南研究与评价 II（AGREE II）工具评估合格的 CPG。
共纳入 197 项 CPG 进行审查。与之前的研究结果相比，以下 6 个 AGREE II 领域的评分增加：范围和目的（57.3%比 57.8%）、利益相关者参与（17.6%比 25.0%）、制定的严谨性（10.2%比 13.2%）、清晰度和表述（55.2%比 58.4%）、适用性（9.3%比 25.9%）和编辑独立性（1.1%比 6.3%）。纳入 CPG 的总体评估有所改善：推荐（4 项，2.0%比 0%，0%）和推荐修改（26 项，13.2%比 3 项，2.8%）。用于提出建议的证据水平也有所提高，分别为 59 项（11.9%比 168 项，22.4%）和 88 项（17.7%比 195 项，26.0%），分别为 A 和 B 级。
2013 年至 2018 年中国发表的呼吸疾病 CPG 的总体质量略有提高，但与最佳水平仍存在较大差距，尤其是在制定的严谨性和编辑独立性方面。需要加大力度制定高质量的呼吸疾病循证 CPG。
