Li Chen, Wang Chuangshi, Hao Jun, Zheng Yitian, Yang Jie, Wang Wenyao, Tang Yi-Da
Department of Cardiology and Institute of Vascular Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital, Key Laboratory of Molecular Cardiovascular Science, Ministry of Education, Beijing, China.
State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Peking Union Medical College and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2023 Apr 29;36:100773. doi: 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100773. eCollection 2023 Jul.
Clinical practice is guided by guidelines in the era of evidence-based medicine to improve healthcare. The consistency between the strength of recommendations and the underlying quality of evidence in clinical guidelines and its evolution dynamically reflects the status of medical practice in important aspects. This study aimed to evaluate the levels of evidence (LOEs) supporting different classes of recommendations (CORs) in Chinese cardiovascular disease (CVD) guidelines between 2003 and 2021, and changes over time.
Clinical guideline documents on cardiovascular topics issued by leading professional organizations were retrieved in the Databases of SinoMed and Wanfang Med Online from inception to June 2021. All guidelines were screened through abstract and full-text reading, and included if satisfying the pre-specified criteria. 79 Chinese guideline documents on 12 sub-topics including a total of 5195 recommendations and the designated CORs/LOEs, were abstracted. The number of recommendations of Class Ⅰ, Class Ⅱ, Class Ⅲ, LOE A, LOE B, and LOE C were identified for each guideline document. The proportion of CORs, LOEs, and COR-LOE combinations in guidelines and the changes among those with ≥2 versions.
A total of 79 guidelines were included in the analysis. When examining the status of current guidelines, among the 3325 recommendations derived from 59 documents during 2011-2021, 735 recommendations (22.1%) were classified as LOE A, 1280 (38.5%) as LOE B, and 1310 (39.4%) as LOE C. 596 recommendations (17.9%) were characterized as Class Ⅰ-LOE A, accounting for the majority of LOE A recommendations but only one-third of Class I recommendations. Evidence levels varied greatly across different sub-topics and individual guidelines. There are 9 guidelines on 5 sub-topics having ≥2 versions. When analyzing the changes over time, although an increase was observed in the total number of recommendations, the proportion of recommendations designated as Class Ⅰ-LOE A did not significantly improve (19.1% [current] vs 19.0% [prior], = 0.97).
In current Chinese CVD guidelines, the high level of evidence lacks, and its alignment with strong recommendations is deficient. Although it shows moderate improvements in certain major topics (e.g., coronary artery disease, interventional therapy, surgery) in the past two decades, the overall proportion of Class I-LOE A recommendations remains small, suggesting that conduction, and particularly translation, of high-quality studies like RCTs addressing CVDs-related questions are still essential and demanded, especially for areas with less attention.
This study was supported by Beijing Nova Program from Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission (Z211100002121063, Z201100006820002); Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (3332022023); National Key R&D Program of China (2020YFC2004705); CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (2021-I2M-5-003); National Natural Science Foundation of China (81825003, 91957123, 82270376).
在循证医学时代,临床实践以指南为指导以改善医疗保健。临床指南中推荐强度与证据基础质量之间的一致性及其动态演变在重要方面反映了医学实践的状况。本研究旨在评估2003年至2021年中国心血管疾病(CVD)指南中支持不同类别推荐(CORs)的证据水平(LOEs)及其随时间的变化。
从中国生物医学文献数据库(SinoMed)和万方医学网数据库自建库至2021年6月检索主要专业组织发布的心血管主题临床指南文件。所有指南通过摘要和全文阅读进行筛选,符合预先设定标准的纳入。提取了79份关于12个亚主题的中文指南文件,共包含5195条推荐及指定的CORs/LOEs。确定每份指南文件中Ⅰ类、Ⅱ类、Ⅲ类推荐以及A级、B级和C级证据水平的推荐数量。分析指南中CORs、LOEs及COR-LOE组合的比例以及有≥2个版本的指南中这些指标的变化情况。
共纳入79份指南进行分析。在审视当前指南的情况时,在2011 - 2021年期间59份文件中的3325条推荐中,735条推荐(22.1%)被归类为A级证据水平,1280条(38.5%)为B级证据水平,1310条(39.4%)为C级证据水平。596条推荐(17.9%)被界定为Ⅰ类 - A级证据水平,占A级证据水平推荐的大多数,但仅占Ⅰ类推荐的三分之一。不同亚主题和各指南之间的证据水平差异很大。有5个亚主题的9份指南有≥2个版本。在分析随时间的变化时,尽管推荐总数有所增加,但被指定为Ⅰ类 - A级证据水平的推荐比例没有显著提高(当前为19.1%,之前为19.0%,P = 0.97)。
在当前中国心血管疾病指南中,高水平证据缺乏,且与强推荐的一致性不足。尽管在过去二十年中某些主要主题(如冠状动脉疾病、介入治疗、手术)有适度改善,但Ⅰ类 - A级证据水平推荐的总体比例仍然较小,这表明开展高质量研究,尤其是将随机对照试验(RCT)等高质量研究转化应用于解决心血管疾病相关问题仍然至关重要且迫切需要,特别是在关注较少的领域。
本研究得到北京市科学技术委员会北京新星计划(Z211100002121063,Z201100006820002)、中央高校基本科研业务费(3332022023)、国家重点研发计划(2020YFC2004705)、中国医学科学院医学与健康科技创新工程(2021-I2M-5-003)、国家自然科学基金(81825003,91957123,82270376)的支持。