Naomi D Dolgoy, Mona M Al Onazi, Joanna F Parkinson, Haukur Gudmundsson, Lori L Radke, Liz Dennett, Kristin L Campbell, Susan R Harris, David Keast, Margaret L McNeely
{"title":"The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.","authors":"Naomi D Dolgoy, Mona M Al Onazi, Joanna F Parkinson, Haukur Gudmundsson, Lori L Radke, Liz Dennett, Kristin L Campbell, Susan R Harris, David Keast, Margaret L McNeely","doi":"10.1089/lrb.2022.0090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context. <b><i>Methods and Results:</i></b> We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context.</p>","PeriodicalId":18168,"journal":{"name":"Lymphatic research and biology","volume":" ","pages":"469-478"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lymphatic research and biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2022.0090","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context. Methods and Results: We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy. Conclusions: No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context.
期刊介绍:
Lymphatic Research and Biology delivers the most current peer-reviewed advances and developments in lymphatic biology and pathology from the world’s leading biomedical investigators. The Journal provides original research from a broad range of investigative disciplines, including genetics, biochemistry and biophysics, cellular and molecular biology, physiology and pharmacology, anatomy, developmental biology, and pathology.
Lymphatic Research and Biology coverage includes:
-Vasculogenesis and angiogenesis
-Genetics of lymphatic disorders
-Human lymphatic disease, including lymphatic insufficiency and associated vascular anomalies
-Physiology of intestinal fluid and protein balance
-Immunosurveillance and immune cell trafficking
-Tumor biology and metastasis
-Pharmacology
-Lymphatic imaging
-Endothelial and smooth muscle cell biology
-Inflammation, infection, and autoimmune disease