Assessment of the Quality of Current American Dental Association Clinical Practice Guidelines.

IF 2.2 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
S D London, S Chamut, P Fontelo, T Iafolla, B A Dye
{"title":"Assessment of the Quality of Current American Dental Association Clinical Practice Guidelines.","authors":"S D London,&nbsp;S Chamut,&nbsp;P Fontelo,&nbsp;T Iafolla,&nbsp;B A Dye","doi":"10.1177/23800844221083563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The American Dental Association (ADA) defines evidence-based dentistry (EBD) as \"an approach to oral healthcare that requires the judicious integration of systematic assessments of clinically relevant scientific evidence, relating to the oral and medical condition and history, with the dentist's clinical expertise and the patient's treatment needs and preferences.\" Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements that include recommendations intended to optimize patient care that are informed by a systematic review of evidence and an assessment of the benefits and harms of alternative care options. Therefore, ADA CPGs are the most rigorous examples of EBD to inform clinical practice. CPGs should be of the highest level of quality to ensure the appropriateness and timeliness of clinical recommendations.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to measure the methodological rigor and transparency of the ADA CPGs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Each ADA CPG was appraised by 4 independent assessors using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Quantitative quality scores were obtained for 6 domains and overall quality. In addition, assessors provided a qualitative analysis by providing comments for each item and an appraisal of the full recommendation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A quality score of 75% was used as the threshold for high-quality guidelines. Using this metric, 6 of the current 10 current ADA CPGs were considered to be of high quality, 1 was slightly below the quality threshold, and 3 were considered marginal. Even among those evaluated to be high quality in overall assessment, certain domains did not reach the quality threshold of 75%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, the ADA CPGs collectively provide high-quality guidance for the clinician. While the AGREE appraisal guidelines have been used in CPG development since 2016, there is still room for improvement in certain domains (i.e., stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence).</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>The results of this study summarize the methodological rigor and transparency of the 10 current ADA clinical practice guidelines. Since adoption of AGREE standards (2016), CPGs have been uniformly of high quality. The quality of older CPGs was somewhat lower but overall deemed acceptable. Thus, ADA CPGs may be used with confidence to inform practitioners of treatment options supported by rigorous evidence-based dentistry standards. However, there is still room for improvement in methodological quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":14783,"journal":{"name":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10029135/pdf/10.1177_23800844221083563.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844221083563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: The American Dental Association (ADA) defines evidence-based dentistry (EBD) as "an approach to oral healthcare that requires the judicious integration of systematic assessments of clinically relevant scientific evidence, relating to the oral and medical condition and history, with the dentist's clinical expertise and the patient's treatment needs and preferences." Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements that include recommendations intended to optimize patient care that are informed by a systematic review of evidence and an assessment of the benefits and harms of alternative care options. Therefore, ADA CPGs are the most rigorous examples of EBD to inform clinical practice. CPGs should be of the highest level of quality to ensure the appropriateness and timeliness of clinical recommendations.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to measure the methodological rigor and transparency of the ADA CPGs.

Methods: Each ADA CPG was appraised by 4 independent assessors using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Quantitative quality scores were obtained for 6 domains and overall quality. In addition, assessors provided a qualitative analysis by providing comments for each item and an appraisal of the full recommendation.

Results: A quality score of 75% was used as the threshold for high-quality guidelines. Using this metric, 6 of the current 10 current ADA CPGs were considered to be of high quality, 1 was slightly below the quality threshold, and 3 were considered marginal. Even among those evaluated to be high quality in overall assessment, certain domains did not reach the quality threshold of 75%.

Conclusion: Overall, the ADA CPGs collectively provide high-quality guidance for the clinician. While the AGREE appraisal guidelines have been used in CPG development since 2016, there is still room for improvement in certain domains (i.e., stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence).

Knowledge transfer statement: The results of this study summarize the methodological rigor and transparency of the 10 current ADA clinical practice guidelines. Since adoption of AGREE standards (2016), CPGs have been uniformly of high quality. The quality of older CPGs was somewhat lower but overall deemed acceptable. Thus, ADA CPGs may be used with confidence to inform practitioners of treatment options supported by rigorous evidence-based dentistry standards. However, there is still room for improvement in methodological quality.

当前美国牙科协会临床实践指南的质量评估。
简介:美国牙科协会(ADA)将循证牙科(EBD)定义为“一种口腔保健方法,需要对与口腔和医疗状况和病史相关的临床相关科学证据进行系统评估,并结合牙医的临床专业知识和患者的治疗需求和偏好。”临床实践指南(CPGs)是一种声明,包括旨在优化患者护理的建议,这些建议是通过对证据的系统审查和对替代护理方案的利弊评估得出的。因此,ADA CPGs是临床实践中最严格的EBD例子。CPGs应具有最高质量水平,以确保临床建议的适当性和及时性。目的:本研究的目的是衡量ADA CPGs方法的严谨性和透明度。方法:每个ADA CPG由4名独立评估员使用研究和评估指南评估(AGREE II)工具进行评估。定量质量得分为6个领域和整体质量。此外,评估员通过对每个项目提出评论和对全部建议进行评价,进行了定性分析。结果:以75%的质量分数作为高质量指南的阈值。使用该指标,目前10个ADA cpg中有6个被认为是高质量的,1个略低于质量阈值,3个被认为是边缘的。即使在总体评价为高质量的领域中,某些领域也没有达到75%的质量阈值。结论:总的来说,ADA CPGs为临床医生提供了高质量的指导。虽然自2016年以来,在CPG开发中已经使用了AGREE评估指南,但在某些领域(即利益相关者参与、开发的严谨性、适用性和编辑独立性)仍有改进的空间。知识转移声明:本研究的结果总结了现行10项ADA临床实践指南方法的严谨性和透明度。自采用AGREE标准(2016年)以来,cpg一直保持高质量。老cpg的质量稍低,但总体上还是可以接受的。因此,ADA CPGs可以放心地告知从业人员在严格的循证牙科标准支持下的治疗方案。然而,在方法质量方面仍有改进的余地。
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
JDR Clinical & Translational Research
JDR Clinical & Translational Research DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: JDR Clinical & Translational Research seeks to publish the highest quality research articles on clinical and translational research including all of the dental specialties and implantology. Examples include behavioral sciences, cariology, oral & pharyngeal cancer, disease diagnostics, evidence based health care delivery, human genetics, health services research, periodontal diseases, oral medicine, radiology, and pathology. The JDR Clinical & Translational Research expands on its research content by including high-impact health care and global oral health policy statements and systematic reviews of clinical concepts affecting clinical practice. Unique to the JDR Clinical & Translational Research are advances in clinical and translational medicine articles created to focus on research with an immediate potential to affect clinical therapy outcomes.
×
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