Quality of clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder: a systematic review.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Paul Salamh, Merissa Ross, Matthew Cornett, Chase Wattenbarger, Steph Hendren, Amee L Seitz, Jeremy Lewis, Derek Clewley
{"title":"Quality of clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder: a systematic review.","authors":"Paul Salamh, Merissa Ross, Matthew Cornett, Chase Wattenbarger, Steph Hendren, Amee L Seitz, Jeremy Lewis, Derek Clewley","doi":"10.1080/09593985.2024.2421881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Perform a systematic critical appraisal of current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for frozen shoulder.</p><p><strong>Literature survey: </strong>Systematic review of CPGs (PROSPERO number CRD42022368775). Inclusion criteria- CPGs written in English providing guidance on the evaluation and or treatment for frozen shoulder, traumatic injury and neurologic CPGs were excluded.Relevant studies were assessed for inclusion and selected studies were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and CINAHL databases. The search strategy was developed by a biomedical librarian, performed on October 9, 2024.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Data were extracted from the selected CPGs and underwent quality assessment using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II.</p><p><strong>Synthesis: </strong>The search resulted in 38,428 studies and 2 CPGs were retained for appraisal. The mean overall AGREE II score was 75% (SD = 5.7). Lowest mean scores were found in the <i>applicability</i> (27% SD = 24.0) and <i>editorial independence</i> (48% SD = 14.1) domains. The highest domain scores were found in <i>scope and purpose</i> (92% SD = 7.8) and <i>clarity and presentation</i> (79% SD = 9.9). One CPG was rated as low quality based on <i>a priori</i> criteria and ultimately one higher quality CPG was recommended.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the advances in research that have developed over the last decade pertaining to the evaluation and treatment of frozen shoulder there is a critical need for an up to date, evidence informed, high quality CPG in order to identify gaps in our knowledge that the global research community should address.</p>","PeriodicalId":48699,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2024.2421881","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Perform a systematic critical appraisal of current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for frozen shoulder.

Literature survey: Systematic review of CPGs (PROSPERO number CRD42022368775). Inclusion criteria- CPGs written in English providing guidance on the evaluation and or treatment for frozen shoulder, traumatic injury and neurologic CPGs were excluded.Relevant studies were assessed for inclusion and selected studies were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and CINAHL databases. The search strategy was developed by a biomedical librarian, performed on October 9, 2024.

Methodology: Data were extracted from the selected CPGs and underwent quality assessment using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II.

Synthesis: The search resulted in 38,428 studies and 2 CPGs were retained for appraisal. The mean overall AGREE II score was 75% (SD = 5.7). Lowest mean scores were found in the applicability (27% SD = 24.0) and editorial independence (48% SD = 14.1) domains. The highest domain scores were found in scope and purpose (92% SD = 7.8) and clarity and presentation (79% SD = 9.9). One CPG was rated as low quality based on a priori criteria and ultimately one higher quality CPG was recommended.

Conclusion: Given the advances in research that have developed over the last decade pertaining to the evaluation and treatment of frozen shoulder there is a critical need for an up to date, evidence informed, high quality CPG in order to identify gaps in our knowledge that the global research community should address.

肩周炎临床实践指南的质量:系统综述。
目的:对目前肩周炎的临床实践指南(CPG)进行系统的批判性评估:对目前治疗肩周炎的临床实践指南(CPG)进行系统的批判性评估:文献调查:CPGs 系统综述(PROSPERO 编号 CRD42022368775)。纳入标准--以英语撰写的为肩周炎的评估和治疗提供指导的 CPGs、外伤性和神经性 CPGs 均被排除在外。对纳入的相关研究进行了评估,并从 PubMed、EMBASE、Scopus 和 CINAHL 数据库中确定了部分研究。检索策略由生物医学图书管理员制定,于 2024 年 10 月 9 日执行:从选定的 CPG 中提取数据,并使用研究与评价指南评估(AGREE)II 进行质量评估:搜索结果为 38,428 项研究,保留 2 份 CPG 进行评估。AGREE II 的平均总得分为 75%(SD = 5.7)。适用性(27% SD = 24.0)和编辑独立性(48% SD = 14.1)领域的平均得分最低。得分最高的领域是范围和目的(92% SD = 7.8)以及清晰度和表述(79% SD = 9.9)。根据先验标准,有一份 CPG 被评为低质量,最终推荐了一份质量更高的 CPG:鉴于过去十年中有关肩周炎评估和治疗的研究取得了进展,我们亟需一份最新的、循证的、高质量的 CPG,以确定全球研究界应解决的知识差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The aim of Physiotherapy Theory and Practice is to provide an international, peer-reviewed forum for the publication, dissemination, and discussion of recent developments and current research in physiotherapy/physical therapy. The journal accepts original quantitative and qualitative research reports, theoretical papers, systematic literature reviews, clinical case reports, and technical clinical notes. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice; promotes post-basic education through reports, reviews, and updates on all aspects of physiotherapy and specialties relating to clinical physiotherapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信