大流行期间妊娠期COVID-19管理临床实践指南质量:系统评价

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Luz García-Valdés, Bassel H Al Wattar, Mar García-Valdés, Carmen Amezcua-Prieto
{"title":"大流行期间妊娠期COVID-19管理临床实践指南质量:系统评价","authors":"Luz García-Valdés, Bassel H Al Wattar, Mar García-Valdés, Carmen Amezcua-Prieto","doi":"10.1093/eurpub/ckaf046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted maternity care, highlighting the need for rapid, high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to ensure safe care for pregnant women. We assessed the quality and recommendations of CPGs related to COVID-19 in pregnancy. Following prospective registration (PROSPERO number: CRD42022346031) we searched Medline, Web of Science, and UpToDate from inception until July 2024. The methodological quality was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II). A total of 27 CPGs were included. High scores were achieved in scope and purpose (21/27, 78%) and clarity (17/27, 63%). The most poorly addressed domains were rigour of development and applicability to clinical practice (18/27, 67% and 19/27, 70% scored low quality, respectively). Overall, only four (15%) guidelines were recommended. Most CPGs (25/27, 93%) addressed COVID-19 screening and transmission prevention, but few covered psychological care (3/27, 11%) or maternal delivery preferences (4/21, 19%). Consensus was found on timing and mode of delivery (16/17, 94%), but there was disagreement on delayed cord clamping and virus transmission interventions. Evidence-based practice requires health care providers, patients and stakeholders to be aware of variations in both the quality and recommendations of CPGs, especially during times of uncertainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":12059,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Public Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of clinical practice guidelines on the COVID-19 management in pregnancy during the pandemic: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Luz García-Valdés, Bassel H Al Wattar, Mar García-Valdés, Carmen Amezcua-Prieto\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/eurpub/ckaf046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted maternity care, highlighting the need for rapid, high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to ensure safe care for pregnant women. We assessed the quality and recommendations of CPGs related to COVID-19 in pregnancy. Following prospective registration (PROSPERO number: CRD42022346031) we searched Medline, Web of Science, and UpToDate from inception until July 2024. The methodological quality was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II). A total of 27 CPGs were included. High scores were achieved in scope and purpose (21/27, 78%) and clarity (17/27, 63%). The most poorly addressed domains were rigour of development and applicability to clinical practice (18/27, 67% and 19/27, 70% scored low quality, respectively). Overall, only four (15%) guidelines were recommended. Most CPGs (25/27, 93%) addressed COVID-19 screening and transmission prevention, but few covered psychological care (3/27, 11%) or maternal delivery preferences (4/21, 19%). Consensus was found on timing and mode of delivery (16/17, 94%), but there was disagreement on delayed cord clamping and virus transmission interventions. Evidence-based practice requires health care providers, patients and stakeholders to be aware of variations in both the quality and recommendations of CPGs, especially during times of uncertainty.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12059,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaf046\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaf046","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行扰乱了孕产妇护理,突出表明需要制定快速、高质量的临床实践指南(CPGs),以确保孕妇的安全护理。我们评估了妊娠期与COVID-19相关的CPGs的质量和建议。在预期注册(PROSPERO编号:CRD42022346031)之后,我们搜索了Medline, Web of Science和UpToDate,从成立到2024年7月。使用研究和评估指南II (AGREE II)对方法学质量进行评价。共纳入27个cpg。在范围和目的(21/ 27,78%)和清晰度(17/ 27,63%)方面得分较高。开发的严谨性和临床实践的适用性是最差的领域(分别为18/ 27,67%和19/ 27,70%)。总的来说,只有4个(15%)指南被推荐。大多数CPGs(25/ 27,93%)涉及COVID-19筛查和传播预防,但很少涉及心理护理(3/ 27,11%)或产妇分娩偏好(4/ 21,19%)。在分娩时间和方式上达成了共识(16/17,94%),但在延迟脐带夹紧和病毒传播干预方面存在分歧。基于证据的实践要求卫生保健提供者、患者和利益相关者意识到CPGs的质量和建议的变化,特别是在不确定时期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quality of clinical practice guidelines on the COVID-19 management in pregnancy during the pandemic: a systematic review.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted maternity care, highlighting the need for rapid, high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to ensure safe care for pregnant women. We assessed the quality and recommendations of CPGs related to COVID-19 in pregnancy. Following prospective registration (PROSPERO number: CRD42022346031) we searched Medline, Web of Science, and UpToDate from inception until July 2024. The methodological quality was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II). A total of 27 CPGs were included. High scores were achieved in scope and purpose (21/27, 78%) and clarity (17/27, 63%). The most poorly addressed domains were rigour of development and applicability to clinical practice (18/27, 67% and 19/27, 70% scored low quality, respectively). Overall, only four (15%) guidelines were recommended. Most CPGs (25/27, 93%) addressed COVID-19 screening and transmission prevention, but few covered psychological care (3/27, 11%) or maternal delivery preferences (4/21, 19%). Consensus was found on timing and mode of delivery (16/17, 94%), but there was disagreement on delayed cord clamping and virus transmission interventions. Evidence-based practice requires health care providers, patients and stakeholders to be aware of variations in both the quality and recommendations of CPGs, especially during times of uncertainty.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Public Health
European Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
2.30%
发文量
2039
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Public Health (EJPH) is a multidisciplinary journal aimed at attracting contributions from epidemiology, health services research, health economics, social sciences, management sciences, ethics and law, environmental health sciences, and other disciplines of relevance to public health. The journal provides a forum for discussion and debate of current international public health issues, with a focus on the European Region. Bi-monthly issues contain peer-reviewed original articles, editorials, commentaries, book reviews, news, letters to the editor, announcements of events, and various other features.
×
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