Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for neonatal sepsis using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Instrument: A systematic review of neonatal guidelines

被引：6

作者：

Amer, Yasser S. ^{[1
,2
,3
,4
,5
]}

Shaiba, Lana A. ^{[6
,7
]}

Hadid, Adnan ^{[6
,7
]}

Anabrees, Jasim ^{[6
,7
,8
]}

Almehery, Abdulrahman ^{[9
]}

AAssiri, Manal ^{[10
]}

Alnemri, Abdulrahman ^{[6
,7
,8
]}

Al Darwish, Amira R. ^{[11
,12
]}

Baqawi, Badi ^{[13
]}

Aboshaiqah, Ahmad ^{[14
]}

Hneiny, Layal ^{[15
,16
]}

Almaghrabi, Rana H. ^{[17
]}

El-Malky, Ahmed M. ^{[18
,19
]}

Al-Dajani, Nawaf M. ^{[20
]}

机构：

[1] King Khalid Univ Hosp, Pediat Dept, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[2] King Saud Univ Med City, Qual Management Dept, Clin Practice Guidelines & Qual Res Unit, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[3] King Saud Univ, Res Chair Evidence Based Hlth Care & Knowledge Tra, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[4] Alexandria Univ, Alexandria Ctr Evidence Based Clin Practice Guidel, Alexandria, Egypt

[5] Guidelines Int Network, Adaptat Working Grp, Perth, Scotland

[6] King Saud Univ, Coll Med, Pediat Dept, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[7] King Saud Univ Med City, Neonatal Intens Care Unit, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[8] Saudi Neonatol Soc SNS, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[9] Minist Hlth, Neonatol Dept, Assir, Saudi Arabia

[10] Minist Hlth, King Abdulaziz Hosp, Neonatol Dept, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

[11] Second Hlth Cluster Central Reg, Clin Pharm Dept, Pharm Serv, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[12] Minist Hlth, Pharm Dept, King Fahad Med City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[13] Minist Hlth, Obstet & Gynecol Dept, King Fahad Med City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[14] King Saud Univ, Coll Nursing, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[15] Amer Univ Beirut, Univ Lib, Saab Med Lib, Beirut, Lebanon

[16] Univ South Dakota, Wegner Hlth Sci Lib, Sioux Falls, SD USA

[17] Prince Sultan Mil Med City, Dept Pediat, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[18] King Saud Univ, King Saud Univ Med City, Morbid & Mortal Unit, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

[19] Acad Sci Res, Theodor Bilharz Res Inst TBRI, Publ Hlth & Community Med Dept, Cairo, Egypt

[20] King Abdulaziz Univ Hosp, Pediat Dept, Neonatal Intens Care Unit, Infect Dis Unit, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

来源：

FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS | 2022年 / 10卷

关键词：

neonatal sepsis; pediatrics; clinical practice guidelines; systematic review; AGREE II instrument; quality assessment; EARLY-ONSET; MANAGEMENT; SUPPORT; TOOLS;

D O I：

10.3389/fped.2022.891572

中图分类号：

R72 [儿科学];

学科分类号：

100202 ;

摘要：

Background and objective: Neonatal sepsis (NS) continues to be a critical healthcare priority for the coming decades worldwide. The aim of this study was to critically appraise the quality of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for neonatal sepsis and to summarize and compare their recommendations. Methods: This study involves a systematic review of CPGs. We identified clinical questions and eligibility criteria and searched and screened for CPGs using bibliographic and CPG databases and professional societies. Each included CPG was assessed by four independent appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. We summarized the recommendations in a comparison practical table. The systematic review was drafted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Its protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42021258732). Results: Our search retrieved 4,432 citations; of which five CPGs were eligible and appraised: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP 2018) (35 and 34 weeks); Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS 2017); National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE 2021); and Queensland Maternity and Neonatal Services (QH 2020). Among these, the overall assessment of two evidence-based CPGs scored > 70% (NICE and QH), which was consistent with their higher scores in the six domains of the AGREE II instrument. In domain 3 (rigor of development), NICE and QH scored 99 and 60%, respectively. In domain 5 (applicability), they scored 96 and 74%, respectively, and in domain 6 (editorial independence), they scored 90 and 71%, respectively. Conclusion: The methodological quality of the NICE CPG was superior followed by the QH CPG with relevant recommendations for use in practice.

引用

页数：19

共 49 条

[1]

ALAMRI Y, 2021, CUREUS J MED SCIENCE, V13, P18765, DOI DOI 10.7759/CUREUS.18765

[2] International alliance and AGREE-ment of 71 clinical practice guidelines on the management of critical care patients with COVID-19: a living systematic review [J].