Acute management of adults following chest wall injury: An assessment of institutional clinical practice guidelines across the UK and synthesis of care recommendations.

Caleb Chen, Apurv Sehgal, Ceri Battle, Jonathan Hardman, Benjamin Ollivere, David W Hewson
{"title":"Acute management of adults following chest wall injury: An assessment of institutional clinical practice guidelines across the UK and synthesis of care recommendations.","authors":"Caleb Chen, Apurv Sehgal, Ceri Battle, Jonathan Hardman, Benjamin Ollivere, David W Hewson","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2024.112077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Chest wall injury causes significant morbidity and mortality. There is uncertainty regarding many aspects of clinical care for these patients, including optimal analgesia, acuity of monitoring and surgical fixation. Our aim in this work is to [1] objectively appraise the quality and extent of heterogeneity in UK major trauma centre (MTC) clinical practice guidelines regarding the management of chest wall injury; and [2] narratively summarise clinical and care process recommendations from these guidelines to provide a comparative description of recommendations between institutions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All major trauma centres in England and Wales were contacted for their institutional clinical practice guidelines relevant to chest wall injury. A literature search was executed seeking eligible supra-regional, national or international consensus documents or guidelines to serve as reference standards. Interrogation of the reference standard guidelines was performed to identify key clinical and care processes against which two blinded assessors judged the clinical validity of institutional clinical practice guidelines as part of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II Global Rating Scale (AGREE II-GRS) tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We received 17 institutional clinical practice guidelines and identified themes of care from seven reference standards identified during our literature search. Four institutional clinical practice guidelines were assessed as high-quality by pre-specified AGREE II-GRS criteria. Guidelines scored highly for the quality of their presentation of information (median (interquartile range [IQR]) AGREE II-GRS Item<sub>5</sub> score 5 (4.5-5.5)); however, the quality of guideline development methodology and the guideline completeness in comprehensively addressing the needs of this population was generally poor (median (IQR) AGREE II-GRS Item<sub>1</sub> methodology score 2.92 (2.33-5.25); AGREE II-GRS Item<sub>3</sub> completeness score 2.63 (1.75-5.25) respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This work highlights the paucity of high-quality local clinical practice guidelines to inform the management of adults with chest wall injury admitted to UK MTCs. Although some degree of variation between local guidelines is acceptable, we have identified substantial heterogeneity in the clinical care recommendations between institutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":94042,"journal":{"name":"Injury","volume":" ","pages":"112077"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2024.112077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Chest wall injury causes significant morbidity and mortality. There is uncertainty regarding many aspects of clinical care for these patients, including optimal analgesia, acuity of monitoring and surgical fixation. Our aim in this work is to [1] objectively appraise the quality and extent of heterogeneity in UK major trauma centre (MTC) clinical practice guidelines regarding the management of chest wall injury; and [2] narratively summarise clinical and care process recommendations from these guidelines to provide a comparative description of recommendations between institutions.

Methods: All major trauma centres in England and Wales were contacted for their institutional clinical practice guidelines relevant to chest wall injury. A literature search was executed seeking eligible supra-regional, national or international consensus documents or guidelines to serve as reference standards. Interrogation of the reference standard guidelines was performed to identify key clinical and care processes against which two blinded assessors judged the clinical validity of institutional clinical practice guidelines as part of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II Global Rating Scale (AGREE II-GRS) tool.

Results: We received 17 institutional clinical practice guidelines and identified themes of care from seven reference standards identified during our literature search. Four institutional clinical practice guidelines were assessed as high-quality by pre-specified AGREE II-GRS criteria. Guidelines scored highly for the quality of their presentation of information (median (interquartile range [IQR]) AGREE II-GRS Item5 score 5 (4.5-5.5)); however, the quality of guideline development methodology and the guideline completeness in comprehensively addressing the needs of this population was generally poor (median (IQR) AGREE II-GRS Item1 methodology score 2.92 (2.33-5.25); AGREE II-GRS Item3 completeness score 2.63 (1.75-5.25) respectively).

Conclusions: This work highlights the paucity of high-quality local clinical practice guidelines to inform the management of adults with chest wall injury admitted to UK MTCs. Although some degree of variation between local guidelines is acceptable, we have identified substantial heterogeneity in the clinical care recommendations between institutions.

成人胸壁损伤后的急性管理:整个英国的机构临床实践指南和综合护理建议的评估。
目的:胸壁损伤引起显著的发病率和死亡率。这些患者的临床护理存在许多方面的不确定性,包括最佳镇痛、监测的敏锐度和手术固定。我们在这项工作中的目的是客观地评估英国重大创伤中心(MTC)关于胸壁损伤管理的临床实践指南的质量和异质性程度;[2]叙述性地总结了这些指南中的临床和护理过程建议,以提供机构间建议的比较描述。方法:联系了英格兰和威尔士所有主要创伤中心,了解其与胸壁损伤相关的机构临床实践指南。进行了文献检索,寻找合格的超区域、国家或国际共识文件或准则作为参考标准。对参考标准指南进行询问,以确定关键的临床和护理过程,作为研究与评估指南评估II全球评定量表(AGREE II- grs)工具的一部分,两名盲法评估者根据这些过程判断机构临床实践指南的临床有效性。结果:我们从文献检索中确定的7个参考标准中获得了17个机构临床实践指南和确定的护理主题。四项机构临床实践指南通过预先指定的AGREE II-GRS标准被评估为高质量。指南在信息呈现质量方面得分很高(中位数(四分位数范围[IQR]) AGREE II-GRS Item5得分为5 (4.5-5.5));然而,指南制定方法的质量和全面解决这一人群需求的指南完整性普遍较差(中位数(IQR) AGREE II-GRS Item1方法学得分2.92 (2.33-5.25);AGREE II-GRS Item3完整性评分2.63(分别为1.75-5.25)。结论:这项工作强调了高质量的本地临床实践指南的缺乏,以告知英国MTCs收治的胸壁损伤成人的管理。虽然地方指南之间存在一定程度的差异是可以接受的,但我们已经确定了不同机构之间临床护理建议的实质性异质性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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