Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines

Recently, in an attempt to reduce variability in clinical practice and produce better results for patients, several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the appropriate diagnosis and management of bronchiolitis in infants have been developed. However, the quality of available CPGs for bronchiolit...

Full description

Autores:
Rodriguez‐Martinez, Carlos E.
Sossa‐Briceño, Monica P.
Acuña‐Cordero, Ranniery
Tipo de recurso:
https://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
Fecha de publicación:
2021
Institución:
Universidad El Bosque
Repositorio:
Repositorio U. El Bosque
Idioma:
eng
OAI Identifier:
oai:repositorio.unbosque.edu.co:20.500.12495/5366
Acceso en línea:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12495/5366
https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12446
Palabra clave:
Bronchiolitis
Clinical practice guideline
Health care quality assessment
Rights
License
Acceso abierto
id UNBOSQUE2_706677e392c9285ac4136ffd2a0c64b4
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unbosque.edu.co:20.500.12495/5366
network_acronym_str UNBOSQUE2
network_name_str Repositorio U. El Bosque
repository_id_str
spelling Rodriguez‐Martinez, Carlos E.Sossa‐Briceño, Monica P.Acuña‐Cordero, Ranniery2021-02-18T13:48:42Z2021-02-18T13:48:42Z1365-2753https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12495/5366https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12446instname:Universidad El Bosquereponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad El Bosquerepourl:https://repositorio.unbosque.edu.coapplication/pdfengJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 1365-2753, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2017, p. 37-43https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jep.12446Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelinesQuality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelinesArtículo de revistahttps://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1info:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85BronchiolitisClinical practice guidelineHealth care quality assessmentJournal of Evaluation in Clinical PracticeRecently, in an attempt to reduce variability in clinical practice and produce better results for patients, several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the appropriate diagnosis and management of bronchiolitis in infants have been developed. However, the quality of available CPGs for bronchiolitis management has not yet been systematically evaluated. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of acute viral bronchiolitis CPGs. We performed a systematic and exhaustive search of CPGs on bronchiolitis published from 2000 to 2014. Three independent appraisers assessed the quality of the CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. A standardized score was calculated for each of the six domains, and the CPGS were rated as recommended, recommended with modifications, or not recommended. Six CPGs published between the years 2000 and 2014 were selected from a total of 111 citations. There was substantial agreement among reviewers (ICC: 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61–0.89). The domains that scored the highest were ‘scope and purpose’, with a mean value of 92.1% (range: 77.8–100%), and ‘clarity of presentation’ [83.3% (69.4–91.7%)]. Those that scored the lowest were ‘applicability’ [44.3% (8.3–77.1%)], and ‘stakeholder involvement’ [66.7% (47.2–94.4%)]. Three CPGS were evaluated as being recommended with modifications, and only two were recommended for use in clinical practice. Available bronchiolitis CPGs vary in quality, and the findings of the present study are useful for identifying aspects or domains where there is room for improvement in future CPGs.Acceso abiertohttps://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Acceso abierto2017-02http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf220.500.12495/5366oai:pruebas-update-repositorio-unbosque.cloudbiteca.com:20.500.12495/53662022-05-02T17:37:48.222Zmetadata.onlyhttps://pruebas-update-repositorio-unbosque.cloudbiteca.comRepositorio Institucional Universidad El Bosquebibliotecas@biteca.com
dc.title.spa.fl_str_mv Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
dc.title.translated.spa.fl_str_mv Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
title Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
spellingShingle Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
Bronchiolitis
Clinical practice guideline
Health care quality assessment
title_short Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
title_full Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
title_fullStr Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
title_full_unstemmed Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
title_sort Quality assessment of acute viral bronchiolitis clinical practice guidelines
dc.creator.fl_str_mv Rodriguez‐Martinez, Carlos E.
Sossa‐Briceño, Monica P.
Acuña‐Cordero, Ranniery
dc.contributor.author.none.fl_str_mv Rodriguez‐Martinez, Carlos E.
Sossa‐Briceño, Monica P.
Acuña‐Cordero, Ranniery
dc.subject.keywords.spa.fl_str_mv Bronchiolitis
Clinical practice guideline
Health care quality assessment
topic Bronchiolitis
Clinical practice guideline
Health care quality assessment
description Recently, in an attempt to reduce variability in clinical practice and produce better results for patients, several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the appropriate diagnosis and management of bronchiolitis in infants have been developed. However, the quality of available CPGs for bronchiolitis management has not yet been systematically evaluated. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of acute viral bronchiolitis CPGs. We performed a systematic and exhaustive search of CPGs on bronchiolitis published from 2000 to 2014. Three independent appraisers assessed the quality of the CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. A standardized score was calculated for each of the six domains, and the CPGS were rated as recommended, recommended with modifications, or not recommended. Six CPGs published between the years 2000 and 2014 were selected from a total of 111 citations. There was substantial agreement among reviewers (ICC: 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61–0.89). The domains that scored the highest were ‘scope and purpose’, with a mean value of 92.1% (range: 77.8–100%), and ‘clarity of presentation’ [83.3% (69.4–91.7%)]. Those that scored the lowest were ‘applicability’ [44.3% (8.3–77.1%)], and ‘stakeholder involvement’ [66.7% (47.2–94.4%)]. Three CPGS were evaluated as being recommended with modifications, and only two were recommended for use in clinical practice. Available bronchiolitis CPGs vary in quality, and the findings of the present study are useful for identifying aspects or domains where there is room for improvement in future CPGs.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv 2021-02-18T13:48:42Z
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv 2021-02-18T13:48:42Z
dc.type.coar.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.type.coarversion.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
dc.type.local.none.fl_str_mv Artículo de revista
dc.type.coar.none.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.driver.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format https://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 1365-2753
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12495/5366
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12446
dc.identifier.instname.spa.fl_str_mv instname:Universidad El Bosque
dc.identifier.reponame.spa.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad El Bosque
dc.identifier.repourl.none.fl_str_mv repourl:https://repositorio.unbosque.edu.co
identifier_str_mv 1365-2753
instname:Universidad El Bosque
reponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad El Bosque
repourl:https://repositorio.unbosque.edu.co
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12495/5366
https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12446
dc.language.iso.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartofseries.spa.fl_str_mv Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 1365-2753, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2017, p. 37-43
dc.relation.uri.none.fl_str_mv https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jep.12446
dc.rights.coar.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.local.spa.fl_str_mv Acceso abierto
dc.rights.accessrights.none.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
Acceso abierto
dc.rights.creativecommons.none.fl_str_mv 2017-02
rights_invalid_str_mv Acceso abierto
https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
2017-02
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.format.mimetype.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.journal.spa.fl_str_mv Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
institution Universidad El Bosque
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositorio Institucional Universidad El Bosque
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bibliotecas@biteca.com
_version_ 1849967237855707136