Pooja Gandhi, Wimonchat Tangamornsuksan, Rachel Couban, Gordon H Guyatt, Catriona M Steele, Connie Marras
{"title":"Adherence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Parkinson Disease to Trustworthy Standards: A Systematic Survey.","authors":"Pooja Gandhi, Wimonchat Tangamornsuksan, Rachel Couban, Gordon H Guyatt, Catriona M Steele, Connie Marras","doi":"10.1007/s00455-024-10755-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the high prevalence and burden of dysphagia in Parkinson disease (PD), the availability and trustworthiness of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) regarding its assessment and management remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to appraise the quality of CPGs for dysphagia in PD. We searched OVID Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SpeechBite from January 2011 to July 2023 for guidance documents addressing screening, referral, monitoring, assessment, or management of dysphagia in PD. We additionally conducted an informal search of web pages of relevant professional societies and government organizations. Paired reviewers independently screened studies, and for relevant guidance documents, abstracted data and assessed their quality using the National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards instrument. Thirteen CPGs proved eligible. Of these, eight (62%) were developed by professional societies. Overall, CPGs were deemed low quality. Eleven (85%) CPGs reported funding sources, and nine (69%) reported conflicts of interest. Five (35%) guidance documents included a methodologist, four (30%) included patient partners, four (30%) described study selection processes, and two (15%) clearly described relevant benefits and harms. Regarding dysphagia-specific recommendations, less than half of guidance documents met standards for trustworthiness; six (46%) provided a synthesis of available evidence, eight (54%) specified strength of recommendations, and two (15%) articulated unambiguous recommendations. Limited guidance exists regarding screening, monitoring and referral for dysphagia in PD. Existing guidance frequently fails to meet standards for trustworthiness. International, multidisciplinary, evidence-based practice guidelines with adequate methodological and patient partner involvement are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":11508,"journal":{"name":"Dysphagia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dysphagia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-024-10755-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Despite the high prevalence and burden of dysphagia in Parkinson disease (PD), the availability and trustworthiness of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) regarding its assessment and management remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to appraise the quality of CPGs for dysphagia in PD. We searched OVID Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SpeechBite from January 2011 to July 2023 for guidance documents addressing screening, referral, monitoring, assessment, or management of dysphagia in PD. We additionally conducted an informal search of web pages of relevant professional societies and government organizations. Paired reviewers independently screened studies, and for relevant guidance documents, abstracted data and assessed their quality using the National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards instrument. Thirteen CPGs proved eligible. Of these, eight (62%) were developed by professional societies. Overall, CPGs were deemed low quality. Eleven (85%) CPGs reported funding sources, and nine (69%) reported conflicts of interest. Five (35%) guidance documents included a methodologist, four (30%) included patient partners, four (30%) described study selection processes, and two (15%) clearly described relevant benefits and harms. Regarding dysphagia-specific recommendations, less than half of guidance documents met standards for trustworthiness; six (46%) provided a synthesis of available evidence, eight (54%) specified strength of recommendations, and two (15%) articulated unambiguous recommendations. Limited guidance exists regarding screening, monitoring and referral for dysphagia in PD. Existing guidance frequently fails to meet standards for trustworthiness. International, multidisciplinary, evidence-based practice guidelines with adequate methodological and patient partner involvement are needed.
期刊介绍:
Dysphagia aims to serve as a voice for the benefit of the patient. The journal is devoted exclusively to swallowing and its disorders. The purpose of the journal is to provide a source of information to the flourishing dysphagia community. Over the past years, the field of dysphagia has grown rapidly, and the community of dysphagia researchers have galvanized with ambition to represent dysphagia patients. In addition to covering a myriad of disciplines in medicine and speech pathology, the following topics are also covered, but are not limited to: bio-engineering, deglutition, esophageal motility, immunology, and neuro-gastroenterology. The journal aims to foster a growing need for further dysphagia investigation, to disseminate knowledge through research, and to stimulate communication among interested professionals. The journal publishes original papers, technical and instrumental notes, letters to the editor, and review articles.