Quality assessment of clinical guidelines in the care of laryngitis and pharyngitis according to AGREE II.

IF 0.8 Q4 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
CoDAS Pub Date : 2025-01-27 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/2317-1782/e20240016en
Lucas Mateus Rodrigues Carvalho, Ana Paula de Oliveira Barbosa, Nara Amanda Laismann, Débora Santos Lula Barros, Rodrigo Fonseca Lima, Rafael Santos Santana
{"title":"Quality assessment of clinical guidelines in the care of laryngitis and pharyngitis according to AGREE II.","authors":"Lucas Mateus Rodrigues Carvalho, Ana Paula de Oliveira Barbosa, Nara Amanda Laismann, Débora Santos Lula Barros, Rodrigo Fonseca Lima, Rafael Santos Santana","doi":"10.1590/2317-1782/e20240016en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The study aimed to identify and assess the methodological quality of essential clinical guidelines for the management of laryngitis and pharyngitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of clinical guidelines for the management of laryngitis and pharyngitis was performed in three databases. Methodological quality was assessed according to AGREE II, in which each item in its domains was scored by four independent evaluators. To determine the agreement, a weighted Kappa square statistic calculation was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>81 studies were found in the bibliographic sources consulted and all were evaluated. Considering the exclusion criteria, seven guidelines were selected for final evaluation by AGREE II. The squared weighted Kappa coefficient calculated after the first round of evaluation by AGREE II was 0.85, within an almost perfect agreement rate. The domains \"stakeholder engagement\", \"applicability\", and \"editorial independence\" had the lowest mean scores and the highest standard deviation indices. They had, respectively, a mean score of (63.7%) with a standard deviation of (17%), a mean score of (65.7%) with a standard deviation of (22%), and a mean score of (35%) with a standard deviation of (23%). The use of penicillin, erythromycin, ampicillin, amoxicillin, azithromycin and clarithromycin were recommended in (75%) of all guidelines that presented pharmacological measures. As a non-pharmacological measure, oral rehydration and gargling were recommended by two guidelines.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The statistical results indicate that all guidelines were considered as recommended. However, no uniformity was observed in the recommendations of these seven guidelines with regard to non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":46547,"journal":{"name":"CoDAS","volume":"37 1","pages":"e20240016"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11781360/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CoDAS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/e20240016en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The study aimed to identify and assess the methodological quality of essential clinical guidelines for the management of laryngitis and pharyngitis.

Methods: A systematic search of clinical guidelines for the management of laryngitis and pharyngitis was performed in three databases. Methodological quality was assessed according to AGREE II, in which each item in its domains was scored by four independent evaluators. To determine the agreement, a weighted Kappa square statistic calculation was performed.

Results: 81 studies were found in the bibliographic sources consulted and all were evaluated. Considering the exclusion criteria, seven guidelines were selected for final evaluation by AGREE II. The squared weighted Kappa coefficient calculated after the first round of evaluation by AGREE II was 0.85, within an almost perfect agreement rate. The domains "stakeholder engagement", "applicability", and "editorial independence" had the lowest mean scores and the highest standard deviation indices. They had, respectively, a mean score of (63.7%) with a standard deviation of (17%), a mean score of (65.7%) with a standard deviation of (22%), and a mean score of (35%) with a standard deviation of (23%). The use of penicillin, erythromycin, ampicillin, amoxicillin, azithromycin and clarithromycin were recommended in (75%) of all guidelines that presented pharmacological measures. As a non-pharmacological measure, oral rehydration and gargling were recommended by two guidelines.

Conclusion: The statistical results indicate that all guidelines were considered as recommended. However, no uniformity was observed in the recommendations of these seven guidelines with regard to non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment.

Abstract Image

根据AGREE II对喉炎和咽炎护理的临床指南进行质量评估。
目的:本研究旨在确定和评估喉炎和咽炎治疗基本临床指南的方法学质量。方法:系统检索三个数据库中有关喉炎和咽炎治疗的临床指南。方法质量根据AGREE II进行评估,其中每个项目在其领域由四个独立的评估人员评分。为了确定一致性,进行加权Kappa平方统计计算。结果:在参考文献中发现了81项研究,并对所有研究进行了评估。考虑到排除标准,AGREE II选择了7个指南进行最终评估。第一轮评价后,通过AGREE II计算得到的平方加权Kappa系数为0.85,在几乎完美的一致性范围内。“利益相关者参与”、“适用性”和“编辑独立性”领域的平均得分最低,标准差指数最高。他们的平均得分为63.7%,标准差为17%;平均得分为65.7%,标准差为22%;平均得分为35%,标准差为23%。所有提出药理学措施的指南中(75%)推荐使用青霉素、红霉素、氨苄西林、阿莫西林、阿奇霉素和克拉霉素。作为非药物措施,口服补液和漱口被两个指南推荐。结论:统计结果表明,所有指南均为推荐指南。然而,在非药物和药物治疗方面,这七项指南的建议没有一致性。
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
CoDAS
CoDAS AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
103
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信