Quality of Rehabilitation Clinical Practice Guidelines: An Overview Study of AGREE II Appraisals

Recent clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain: a global comparison

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a significant health problem worldwide, with a lifetime prevalence of 84% in the general adult population. To rationalise the management of LBP, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been issued in various countries around the world. This study aims to identify and compare the recommendations of recent CPGs for the management of LBP across the world.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and major guideline databases were searched from 2017 to 2022 to identify CPGs. CPGs focusing on information regarding the management and/or treatment of non-specific LBP were considered eligible. The quality of included guidelines was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument.

RESULTS

Our analysis identified a total of 22 CPGs that met the inclusion criteria, and were of middle and high methodological quality as assessed by the AGREE II tool. The guidelines exhibited heterogeneity in their recommendations, particularly in the approach to different stages of LBP. For acute LBP, the guidelines recommended the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), therapeutic exercise, staying active, and spinal manipulation. For subacute LBP, the guidelines recommended the use of NSAIDs, therapeutic exercise, staying active, and spinal manipulation. For chronic LBP, the guidelines recommended therapeutic exercise, the use of NSAIDs, spinal manipulation, and acupuncture.

CONCLUSIONS

Current CPGs provide recommendations for almost all major aspects of the management of LBP, but there is marked heterogeneity between them. Some recommendations lack clarity and overlap with other treatments within the guidelines.

Advancing guideline quality through country-wide and regional quality assessment of CPGs using AGREE: a scoping review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are evaluated for quality with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) tool, and this is increasingly done for different countries and regional groupings. This scoping review aimed to describe, map, and compare these geographical synthesis studies, that assessed CPG quality using the AGREE tool. This allowed a global interpretation of the current landscape of these country-wide or regional synthesis studies, and a closer look at its methodology and results.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A scoping review was conducted searching databases Medline, Embase, Epistemonikos, and grey literature on 5 October 2021 for synthesis studies using the later versions of AGREE (AGREE II, AGREE-REX and AGREE GRS) to evaluate country-wide or regional CPG quality. Country-wide or regional synthesis studies were the units of analysis, and simple descriptive statistics was used to conduct the analysis. AGREE scores were analysed across subgroups into one of the seven Sustainable Development Goal regions, to allow for meaningful interpretation.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies fulfilled our eligibility criteria, which had included a total of 2918 CPGs. Regions of the Global North, and Eastern and South-Eastern Asia were most represented. Studies were consistent in reporting and presenting their AGREE domain and overall results, but only 18% (n = 10) reported development methods, and 19% (n = 11) reported use of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Overall scores for domains Rigor of development and Editorial independence were low, notably in middle-income countries. Editorial Independence scores, especially, were low across all regions with a maximum domain score of 46%. There were no studies from low-income countries.

CONCLUSION

There is an increasing tendency to appraise country-wide and regionally grouped CPGs, using quality appraisal tools. The AGREE tool, evaluated in this scoping review, was used well and consistently across studies. Findings of low report rates of development of CPGs and of use of GRADE is concerning, as is low domain scores globally for Editorial Independence. Transparent reporting of funding and competing interests, as well as highlighting evidence-to-decision processes, should assist in further improving CPG quality as clinicians are in dire need of high-quality guidelines.

The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

Background: Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context. Methods and Results: We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy. Conclusions: No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context.

Evaluation of Guidelines and Consensus on Ectopic Pregnancy Based by AGREE II Method

Introduction

To evaluate the methodological quality of diagnosis and treatment guidelines/consensus related to ectopic pregnancy.

Materials and methods

Use the "Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation" (AGREE II) method to evaluate the differences among the guideline/consensus.

Results

We appraised 9 clinical practice guidelines for ectopic pregnancy (9 clinical practice guidelines from 5 countries) including the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, and China. The guidelines received the highest scores for clarity of presentation (82.72%) and lowest scores for editorial independence (30.56%). The comprehensive recommendations of the 7 guidelines were Grade B, the other 2 guidelines were Grade C.

Conclusion

The overall quality of the ectopic pregnancy guidelines had room for improvement. It is recommended to supplement and improve the four fields of "independence", "rigor", "participants" and "application", especially the "independence" and "application" fields.

Quality of clinical practice guidelines on interventional management of low back pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the quality of low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines (CPG) that include interventional management recommendations and to associate their quality with characteristics including publication year and creating organization. TYPE: Systematic Review.

LITERATURE SURVEY

LBP (subacute or chronic) CPGs in English (symptom based, governmental or professional society created, January 1990-May 2020) were found using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Ortho Guidelines, CPG Infobase, ECRI, Guidelines International Network, NICE, and SIGN.

METHODOLOGY

In this third order systematic review, search results were deduplicated, title and abstract screened by two independent reviewers, and full texts reviewed by four reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. Resulted CPGs were appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) Tool by four appraisers each. Association of their quality with creating organization, geographical region, and year of creation was calculated.

SYNTHESIS

Seven hundred fourteen screened documents resulted in 21 final CPGs. On appraisal, average overall CPG quality was 5.2 (range 2.5-6.75). Domain 5 (applicability) had the lowest average (44%) and domain 4 (clarity of presentation) had the highest average score (82%). For overall recommendation, 16 received "yes" or "yes with modifications," six received unanimous "yes" and two unanimous "no" votes. The interrater agreement of domain scoring was excellent (0.8-1.0; p < .001). There was no association found between quality of CPG and (1) year of publication (R2  = 0.0006), (2) whether the CPG was updated or new (p = .17), and (3) region of publication (p = .37).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of the 21 CPGs identified in this systematic review were of high quality, but overall quality and recommendation ratings were variable. The quality of appraised CPGs showed no association with their characteristics. Some domains such as "applicability" scored uniformly lower, revealing opportunity for improvement in future CPG development. LBP CPGs should be scrutinized before adopting their recommendations.

Variation in Outcomes and Number of Visits Following Care Guideline Implementation: Part 2 of an Analysis of 12 355 Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE: To describe the variation in outcomes and number of visits before and after implementing a care guideline for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) rehabilitation. DESIGN: Nonrandomized intervention study. METHODS: We compared 2558 patients with TKA who received care that was not standardized (non-care guideline [NCG] group) to 9797 patients with TKA who received care according to the care guideline (CG). We fit 2 Bayesian hierarchical linear regression models using the Knee Outcome Survey - Activities of Daily Living (KOS-ADL) change score and number of physical therapy (PT) visits as the response variables, controlling for relevant predictor variables. We also compared the ratio of the standard deviations of the KOS-ADL change scores and the number of PT visits within and between clinics. RESULTS: The overall estimated mean improvement in KOS-ADL change score was 23.0 points (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3, 25.7) in the NCG group and 28.7 points (95% CI: 27.5, 29.7) in the CG group; the mean difference was 5.6 (2.7-8.6). Mean KOS-ADL change scores were higher in the CG group than the NCG group in every clinic, although only 8 clinics improved significantly. The number of PT visits did not change meaningfully (NCG: mean, 10.7 [95% CI: 9.9, 11.5]; CG: mean, 10.5 [95% CI: 9.9, 10.9]). Variation in KOS-ADL change score decreased by 4% within clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.93, 0.99]) and 63% between clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.21, 0.62]). Variation in number of visits decreased by 7% within clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.90, 0.96]) and 19% between clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.81 [95% CI: 0.39, 1.49]). CONCLUSION: Implementing a care guideline for TKA rehabilitation may improve outcomes and reduce unwarranted variation in practice within clinics and especially between clinics within a large health care system. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(3):151-158. Epub: 12 December 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11370.

Methodological transparency of preoperative clinical practice guidelines for elective surgery. Systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are statements that provide recommendations regarding the approach to different diseases and aim to increase quality while decreasing the risk of complications in health care. Numerous guidelines in the field of perioperative care have been published in the previous decade but their methodological quality and transparency are relatively unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To critically evaluate the transparency and methodological quality of published CPG in the preoperative assessment and management of adult patients undergoing elective surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review and methodological appraisal study.

DATA SOURCES

We searched for eligible CPG published in English or Spanish between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2022, in Pubmed MEDLINE, TRIP Database, Embase, the Cochrane Library, as well as in representatives' medical societies of Anaesthesiology and developers of CPG.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

CPG dedicated on preoperative fasting, cardiac assessment for non-cardiac surgery, and the use of routine preoperative tests were included. Methodological quality and transparency of CPG were assessed by 3 evaluators using the 6 domains of the AGREE-II tool.

RESULTS

We included 20 CPG of which 14 were classified as recommended guidelines. The domain of "applicability" scored the lowest (44%), while the domains "scope and objective" and "editorial interdependence" received the highest median scores of 93% and 97% respectively. The remaining domains received scores ranging from 44% to 84%. The top mean scored CPG in preoperative fasting was ASA 2017 (93%); among cardiac evaluation, CPG for non-cardiac surgery were CCS 2017 (91%), ESC-ESA 2014 (90%), and AHA-ACC 2014 (89%); in preoperative testing ICSI 2020 (97%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the last ten years, most published CPG in the preoperative assessment or management of adult patients undergoing elective surgery focused on preoperative fasting, cardiac assessment for non-cardiac surgery, and use of routine preoperative tests, present moderate to high methodological quality and can be recommended for their use or adaptation. Applicability and stakeholder involvement domains must be improved in the development of future guidelines.

More than one third of clinical practice guidelines on low back pain overlap in AGREE II appraisals. Research wasted?

Background

Systematic reviews can apply the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool to critically appraise clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for treating low back pain (LBP); however, when appraisals differ in CPG quality rating, stakeholders, clinicians, and policy-makers will find it difficult to discern a unique judgement of CPG quality. We wanted to determine the proportion of overlapping CPGs for LBP in appraisals that applied AGREE II. We also compared inter-rater reliability and variability across appraisals.

Methods

For this meta-epidemiological study we searched six databases for appraisals of CPGs for LBP. The general characteristics of the appraisals were collected; the unit of analysis was the CPG evaluated in each appraisal. The inter-rater reliability and the variability of AGREE II domain scores for overall assessment were measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient and descriptive statistics.

Results

Overall, 43 CPGs out of 106 (40.6%) overlapped in seventeen appraisals. Half of the appraisals (53%) reported a protocol registration. Reporting of AGREE II assessment was heterogeneous and generally of poor quality: overall assessment 1 (overall CPG quality) was rated in 11 appraisals (64.7%) and overall assessment 2 (recommendation for use) in four (23.5%). Inter-rater reliability was substantial/perfect in 78.3% of overlapping CPGs. The domains with most variability were Domain 6 (mean interquartile range [IQR] 38.6), Domain 5 (mean IQR 28.9), and Domain 2 (mean IQR 27.7).

Conclusions

More than one third of CPGs for LBP have been re-appraised in the last six years with CPGs quality confirmed in most assessments. Our findings suggest that before conducting a new appraisal, researchers should check systematic review registers for existing appraisals. Clinicians need to rely on updated CPGs of high quality and confirmed by perfect agreement in multiple appraisals.

Trial Registration

Protocol Registration OSF: https://osf.io/rz7nh/

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01621-w.

AGREE II appraisals of clinical practice guidelines in rehabilitation showed poor reporting and moderate variability in quality ratings when users apply different cuff-offs: a methodological study

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the reporting characteristics of Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II appraisals in rehabilitation and explore how much quality ratings of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) vary applying different cut-offs.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a methodological study re-analyzing data of an overview of AGREE II CPG appraisals in rehabilitation. Reporting characteristics of appraisals and methods used for quality rating were abstracted. We applied the most frequent cut-offs retrieved on all CPG sample to explore changes in quality ratings (i.e., high/low).

RESULTS

We included 40 appraisals (n = 544 CPGs).The AGREE II overall assessment 1 (overall CPG quality) was reported in 26 appraisals (65%) and the overall assessment 2 (recommendation for use) in 17 (42.5%). Twenty-five appraisals (62.5%) reported the use of cut-offs based on domains and/or overall assessments. Application of the most reported cut-offs led to variability in quality ratings in 26% of the CPGs, of which 92% CPGs shifted their rating from low to high-quality and 8% shifted from high to low-quality.

CONCLUSION

Rehabilitation stakeholders should take care to select the highest quality CPG in view of the poor reporting of AGREE II overall assessment 1 and 2 and moderate variability of quality ratings.

What Determines the Quality of Rehabilitation Clinical Practice Guidelines?: An Overview Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine what factors determine the quality of rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines.

DESIGN

Six databases were searched for articles that had applied the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II quality assessment tool to rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines. The 573 deduplicated abstracts were independently screened by two authors, resulting in 81 articles, the full texts of which were independently screened by two authors for Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II application to rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines, resulting in a final selection of 40 reviews appraising 504 clinical practice guidelines. Data were extracted from these by one author and checked by a second. Data on each clinical practice guideline included the six Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II domain scores, as well as the two Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II global evaluations.

RESULTS

All six Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II domain scores were statistically significant predictors of overall clinical practice guideline quality rating; D3 (rigor of development) was the strongest and D1 (scope and purpose) the weakest (overall model P < 0.001, R2 = 0.53). Five of the six domain scores were significant predictors of the clinical practice guideline use recommendation, with D3 the strongest predictor and D5 (applicability) the weakest (overall model P < 0.001, pseudo R2 = 0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Quality of rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines may be improved by addressing key domains such as rigor of development.

What does it take to facilitate the integration of clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain into practice? Part 1: A synthesis of recommendation

BACKGROUND

Despite the emergence of multiple clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the rehabilitation of low back pain (LBP) over the last decade, self-reported levels of disability in this population have not improved. This may be explained by the numerous implementation barriers, such as the complexity of information and sheer volumes of CPGs.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to summarize the evidence and recommendations from the most recent and high-quality CPGs on the rehabilitation management of LBP by developing an infographic summarizing the recommendations to facilitate dissemination into clinical practice.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of high-quality CPGs with an emphasis on rehabilitation approaches. We searched major health-related research databases (e.g., PubMed, CINAHL, and PEDro). We performed quality assessment via the AGREE-II instrument. Contents of the CPGs were synthesized by extracting recommendations, which were then compared to one another to identify consistencies based on an iterative evaluation process.

RESULTS

We identified and assessed 5 recent high-quality CPGs. We synthesized 13 recommendations on the rehabilitation management of LBP (2 for screening procedures, 3 for assessment procedures, and 8 involving treatment approaches) and 2 underlying principles were highlighted. These results were then synthetized and illustrated in a concise infographic that serves as a conceptual roadmap that identifies the specific behavior changes (i.e., adoption of CPGs' recommendations) rehabilitation professionals should adopt in order to integrate an evidenced-based approach for the management of LBP.

CONCLUSIONS

We systematically reviewed the literature for CPGs' recommendations for the physical rehabilitation management of LBP and synthesized the information through an infographic.

What does it take to facilitate the integration of clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain into practice? Part 2: A strategic plan to activate dissemination

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide among all musculoskeletal disorders despite an intense focus in research efforts. Researchers and decision makers have produced multiple clinical practice guidelines for the rehabilitation of LBP, which contain specific recommendations for clinicians. Adherence to these recommendations may have several benefits, such as improving the quality of care for patients living with LBP, by ensuring that the best evidence-based care is being delivered. However, clinicians' adherence to recommendations from these guidelines is low and numerous implementation barriers and challenges, such as complexity of information and sheer volume of guidelines have been documented. In a previous paper, we performed a systematic review of the literature to identify high-quality clinical practice guidelines on the management of LBP, and developed a concise yet comprehensive infographic that summarizes the recommendations from these guidelines. Considering the wealth of scientific evidence, passive dissemination alone of this research knowledge is likely to have limitations to help clinicians implement these recommendations into routine practice. Thus, an active and engaging dissemination strategy, aimed at improving the implementation and integration of specific recommendations into practice is warranted. In this paper, we argue that a conceptual framework, such as the theoretical domains framework, could facilitate the implementation of these recommendations into clinical practice. Specifically, we present a systematic approach that could serve to guide the development of a theory-informed knowledge translation intervention as a means to overcome implementation challenges in rehabilitation of LBP.

Knowledge Translation Research to Promote Behavior Changes in Rehabilitation: Use of Theoretical Frameworks and Tailored Interventions: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

To describe knowledge translation (KT) research as a means of changing practice behaviors in rehabilitation. We specifically aimed to explore how theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) are used to guide KT, guide methods to tailor KT interventions, and evaluate outcomes. We hypothesized these methods would have increased over the past 10 years.

DATA SOURCES

We identified articles through searches conducted using databases Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, MEDLINE, PubMed, Academic Search Premier, and previous reviews from January 2000 to April 2020. Search terms included physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech-language pathology, knowledge translation, and knowledge-to-action (KTA).

STUDY SELECTION

Two authors interpedently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. Studies were included if behavior change of rehabilitation practitioners was measured. Systematic reviews, protocols, and capacity-building interventions were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

Three authors extracted information on study design, theoretical frameworks, intervention strategies, and outcome evaluation.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fifty-six studies were included in the review. Sixteen (29%) reported the use of a theoretical framework to guide the KT process. Since 2013, the KTA framework was used 35% of the time. Twenty-two studies (39%) reported barrier assessments to tailor interventions, and 82% were published after 2013. However, barrier assessment in the local context was only conducted 64% of the time. Outcomes of tailored interventions were most frequently measured using chart audits (50%) and questionnaires (41%). Further, the link between KT theory, specific barriers, and selection of intervention strategies was not consistently described.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 7 years, there has been an increase in the use of KT TMFs and tailored interventions. Recommendations for future research include the use of TMFs to guide local barrier assessment, KT strategy selection, intervention development, and overall KT process and mapping barriers to selected intervention strategies.

Systematic review of guidelines to identify recommendations for upper limb robotic rehabilitation after stroke

INTRODUCTION

Upper limb motor impairment is one of the most frequent stroke consequences. Robot therapy may represent a valid option for upper limb stroke rehabilitation, but there are still gaps between research evidence and their use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to determine the quality, scope, and consistency of guidelines clinical practice recommendations for upper limb robotic rehabilitation in stroke populations.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched for guideline recommendations on stroke published between January 1st, 2010 and January 1st, 2020. Only the most recent guidelines for writing group were selected. Electronic databases (N.=4), guideline repertories and professional rehabilitation networks (N.=12) were searched. We systematically reviewed and assessed guidelines containing recommendation statements about upper limb robotic rehabilitation for adults with stroke (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020173386).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Four independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, and textual syntheses were used to appraise and compare recommendations. From 1324 papers that were screened, eight eligible guidelines were identified from six different regions/countries. Half of the included guidelines focused on stroke management, the other half on stroke rehabilitation. Rehabilitation assisted by robotic devices is generally recommended to improve upper limb motor function and strength. The exact characteristics of patients who could benefit from this treatment as well as the correct timing to use it are not known.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review has identified many opportunities to modernize and otherwise improve stroke patients' upper limb robotic therapy. Rehabilitation assisted by robot or electromechanical devices for stroke needs to be improved in clinical practice guidelines in particular in terms of applicability.

Are clinical practice guidelines for low back pain interventions of high quality and updated? A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide recommendations for practice, but the proliferation of CPGs issued by multiple organisations in recent years has raised concern about their quality. The aim of this study was to systematically appraise CPGs quality for low back pain (LBP) interventions and to explore inter-rater reliability (IRR) between quality appraisers. The time between systematic review search and publication of CPGs was recorded.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PEDro, TRIP), guideline organisation databases, websites, and grey literature were searched from January 2016 to January 2020 to identify GPCs on rehabilitative, pharmacological or surgical intervention for LBP management. Four independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool to evaluate CPGs quality and record the year the CPGs were published and the year the search strategies were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 21 CPGs met the inclusion criteria and were appraised. Seven (33%) were broad in scope and involved surgery, rehabilitation or pharmacological intervention. The score for each AGREE II item was: Editorial Independence (median 67%, interquartile range [IQR] 31-84%), Scope and Purpose (median 64%, IQR 22-83%), Rigour of Development (median 50%, IQR 21-72%), Clarity and Presentation (median 50%, IQR 28-79%), Stakeholder Involvement (median 36%, IQR 10-74%), and Applicability (median 11%, IQR 0-46%). The IRR between the assessors was nearly perfect (interclass correlation 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.91). The median time span was 2 years (range, 1-4), however, 38% of the CPGs did not report the coverage dates for systematic searches.

CONCLUSIONS

We found methodological limitations that affect CPGs quality. In our opinion, a universal database is needed in which guidelines can be registered and recommendations dynamically developed through a living systematic reviews approach to ensure that guidelines are based on updated evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TRIAL REGISTRATION: REGISTRATION PROSPERO DETAILS: CRD42019127619 .