Clinical practice guidelines for frailty vary in quality but guide primary health care: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To appraise the methodological quality, clinical applicability, and reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for frailty in primary care and identify research gaps using evidence mapping.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, guideline databases, and frailty or geriatric society websites. Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II, AGREE-Recommendations Excellence, and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare checklist were used to evaluate overall quality for frailty CPGs as "high", "medium", or "low" quality. We used bubble plots to show recommendations in CPGs.

RESULTS

Twelve CPGs were identified. According to the overall quality evaluation, five CPGs were considered as high quality, six as medium quality, and one as low quality. The recommendations in CPGs were generally consistent and mainly focused on frailty prevention, identification, multidisciplinary, nonpharmacological, and other treatments. However, evidence was lacking in some areas, such as effective prevention strategies and implementation of recommendations.

CONCLUSION

The frailty CPGs vary in quality but have consistent recommendations that can guide clinical practice in primary care. This could point the way for future research to address existing gaps and facilitate the development of trustworthy CPGs for frailty.