The methodological quality of clinical guidelines of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)

Association Between Type of Infertility and Live Birth in Couples With a Single Intrauterine Insemination Resulting in Pregnancy: A Propensity Score Matching Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have described the relationship between the type of infertility and live birth in patients treated with intrauterine insemination (IUI). We focused on this issue and attempted to explore it.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 2,256 infertile patients who underwent their first IUI cycle and were subsequently diagnosed with a clinical pregnancy at Ji'an Women and Child Health Care Hospital between 2007 and 2018. Inductees were divided into primary infertility (1,680 patients) and secondary infertility groups (876 patients). Following 1:1 propensity score matching to obtain balanced data, the COX proportional hazards model, landmark analysis, and subgroup analysis were used to assess the association between infertility types and live birth rates. Subsequently, a sensitivity analysis was employed to evaluate the potential effect of unmeasured confounding on outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1,486 patients who were identified as a matched cohort, 743 were in the primary infertility group and the remaining patients were in another group. A total of 1,143 patients had live births during 431,009 person-days of follow-up (average 290.0 days). Throughout the follow-up period, patients with secondary infertility demonstrated more live births than patients with primary infertility (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.30; P = .007). More details were observed in the landmark analysis. Live birth rates were similar in both groups within 316 days of follow-up (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.14; P = .269), whereas the opposite was found between 316 days of follow-up and delivery day (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.34; P = .004). This was also obtained in a subgroup analysis of patients younger than 35 years old and patients treated with natural cycles (NCs) and IUIs.

CONCLUSION

Among the infertile patients who underwent a single natural or stimulated cycle followed by IUI and had later pregnancies, full-term young secondary infertility mothers (<35 years of age) had a greater chance of having viable babies than the primary infertility ones. The latter may get more benefits when undergoing ovarian stimulation and IUI rather than NC-IUI.

Clinical practice guidelines for fertility preservation in young women undergoing gonadotoxic treatment: an overview and critical appraisal of methodological quality and content

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the methodological quality and content of internationally available clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on fertility preservation (FP) care in adult women?

DESIGN

Internationally available CPGs on FP care in adult women were identified after conducting an extensive literature search and consulting (inter)national key experts. The methodological quality of the CPGs was appraised by an (inter)national panel of experts using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. The content of the best CPGs, scoring ≥60% for the domain 'Rigour of development' of the AGREE II instrument, was extracted and categorized according to their topic.

RESULTS

Thirty of the 1808 documents found were included. After consulting (inter)national key experts, 30 CPGs were included, six of which scored ≥60% for their 'Rigour of development'. The number of FP-related topics discussed by these six CPGs ranged from 4 to 12. The number of recommendations provided by the CPGs on these topics varied. The number of topics to which ≥5 recommendations were dedicated ranged from 0 to 4 between CPGs.

CONCLUSION

CPGs on the subject of FP care are available, but there is room for improvement in quality and content. Although written for use in daily practice, the CPGs can also be used to develop quality indicators to monitor the quality of current FP care or to evaluate future improvement initiatives.

Systematic evaluation of the quality of clinical practice guidelines on the use of assisted reproductive techniques

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic evaluation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the use of assisted reproductive technologies.

METHODS

We searched Medline, the Turning Research into Practice database, and guidelines-specific databases from December 2006 to November 2011. Three reviewers independently assessed each Guideline using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. A standardized score was calculated separately for each of the six domains.

RESULTS

Fourteen Guidelines were included. Overall, the quality of these was suboptimal. The scores for each AGREE II domain ranged between 37% and 80%. Three (22%) were deemed "Recommended"; nine (64%),"Recommended with modifications"; and two (14%), "Not recommended". Agreement among reviewers was very good (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient: 0.915 [95% CI 0.807-0.970]).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall quality of the CPGs on Assisted Reproduction Techniques published during the last 5 years is suboptimal. Most Guidelines present significant shortcomings in important domains such as "stakeholder involvement", "rigor of development", and "applicability". Instruments such as the AGREE II and "the Grading of Recommendation Assessment Development and Evaluation" system could prove useful to improve CPGs in this field. Guideline users could benefit from the present results when choosing which guidelines to implement.

Guidelines on chemotherapy in advanced stage gynecological malignancies: an evaluation of 224 professional societies and organizations

Background

Clinical practice guidelines are important for guiding practice, but it is unclear if they are commensurate with the available evidence.

Methods

We examined guidelines produced by cancer and gynecological societies and organizations and evaluated their coverage of and stance towards chemotherapy for advanced stage disease among 4 gynecological malignancies (breast, ovarian, cervical, endometrial cancer) where the evidence for the use of chemotherapy is very different (substantial and conclusive for breast and ovarian cancer, limited and suggesting no major benefit for cervical and endometrial cancer). Eligible societies and organizations were identified through systematic internet searches (last update June 2009). Pertinent websites were scrutinized for presence of clinical practice guidelines, and relative guidelines were analyzed.

Results

Among 224 identified eligible societies and organizations, 69 (31%) provided any sort of guidelines, while recommendations for chemotherapy on advanced stage gynecological malignancies were available in 20 of them. Only 14 had developed their own guideline, and only 5 had developed guidelines for all 4 malignancies. Use of levels of evidence and grades of recommendations, and aspects of the production, implementation, and timeliness of the guidelines did not differ significantly across malignancies. Guidelines on breast and ovarian cancer utilized significantly more randomized trials and meta-analyses. Guidelines differed across malignancies on their coverage of disease-free survival (p = 0.033), response rates (p = 0.024), symptoms relief (p = 0.005), quality of life (p = 0.001) and toxicity (p = 0.039), with breast and ovarian cancer guidelines typically covering more frequently these outcomes. All guidelines explicitly or implicitly endorsed the use of chemotherapy.

Conclusions

Clinical practice guidelines are provided by the minority of professional societies and organizations. Available guidelines tend to recommend chemotherapy even for diseases where the effect of chemotherapy is controversial and recommendations are based on scant evidence.

The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis: an electronic guideline implementability appraisal

Background

Clinical guidelines are intended to improve healthcare. However, even if guidelines are excellent, their implementation is not assured. In subfertility care, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guidelines have been inventoried, and their methodological quality has been assessed. To improve the impact of the ESHRE guidelines and to improve European subfertility care, it is important to optimise the implementability of guidelines. We therefore investigated the implementation barriers of the ESHRE guideline with the best methodological quality and evaluated the used instrument for usability and feasibility.

Methods

We reviewed the ESHRE guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis to assess its implementability. We used an electronic version of the guideline implementability appraisal (eGLIA) instrument. This eGLIA tool consists of 31 questions grouped into 10 dimensions. Seven items address the guideline as a whole, and 24 items assess the individual recommendations in the guideline. The eGLIA instrument identifies factors that influence the implementability of the guideline recommendations. These factors can be divided into facilitators that promote implementation and barriers that oppose implementation. A panel of 10 experts from three European countries appraised all 36 recommendations of the guideline. They discussed discrepancies in a teleconference and completed a questionnaire to evaluate the ease of use and overall utility of the eGLIA instrument.

Results

Two of the 36 guideline recommendations were straightforward to implement. Five recommendations were considered simply statements because they contained no actions. The remaining 29 recommendations were implementable with some adjustments. We found facilitators of the guideline implementability in the quality of decidability, presentation and formatting, apparent validity, and novelty or innovation of the recommendations. Vaguely defined actions, lack of facilities, immeasurable outcomes, and inflexibility within the recommendations formed barriers to implementation. The eGLIA instrument was generally useful and easy to use. However, assessment with the eGLIA instrument is very time-consuming.

Conclusions

The ESHRE guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis could be improved to facilitate its implementation in daily practice. The eGLIA instrument is a helpful tool for identifying obstacles to implementation of a guideline. However, we recommend a concise version of this instrument.