Massimiliano Mistrangelo, Serena Mantova, Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Paolo Iachetta, Andrea Lauretta, Simone Arolfo, Marta Mozzon, Mario Morino, Paola De Nardi
{"title":"使用指南评估研究和评估II (AGREE II)工具对现行AIN管理指南进行评估。","authors":"Massimiliano Mistrangelo, Serena Mantova, Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Paolo Iachetta, Andrea Lauretta, Simone Arolfo, Marta Mozzon, Mario Morino, Paola De Nardi","doi":"10.1177/15533506251362905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>AimAnal Intraepithelial Neoplasia has been a hot topic in colorectal surgery and many Scientific Societies have produced guidelines for their diagnosis and treatment. This study aims to appraise the quality of the existing guidelines in this field.MethodsA systematic review of the Literature was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Scholar Google databases. Seven authors independently valued the quality of guidelines using the AGREE II instrument.ResultsThis study identified and included 9 guidelines of varying quality. The highest scoring guidelines were different considering each domain. NYSDOH ones gained the higher scoring in 2 domains. However, there was considerable variability across the studies and the various domains. The highest scoring domains were domain VI: Editorial Independence (median = 89% across all studies); IV: Clarity of Presentation (median = 61% across all studies) and domain I: Scope & Purpose (median = 59% across all studies). The lowest scores were observed in domain V: Applicability (22%) and domain III: Rigour of Development (29%). Only 2 of the 9 gained unanimous support for their use, whilst 5 guidelines were unanimously declared unsuitable for clinical use. The last 2 guidelines were considered beneficial only for limited purposes.Conclusions4 out of the 9 guidelines examined obtained moderate/good scores in various domains of the AGREE II tool. The review of the guidelines highlighted poor attention to stakeholder involvement and scarce care, mainly in the Rigour of development and Applicability of the guidelines. The AGREE II instrument could improve the drafting of new guidelines or help update published ones.</p>","PeriodicalId":22095,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Innovation","volume":" ","pages":"15533506251362905"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appraisal of the Current Guidelines for the Management of AIN Using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument.\",\"authors\":\"Massimiliano Mistrangelo, Serena Mantova, Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Paolo Iachetta, Andrea Lauretta, Simone Arolfo, Marta Mozzon, Mario Morino, Paola De Nardi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15533506251362905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>AimAnal Intraepithelial Neoplasia has been a hot topic in colorectal surgery and many Scientific Societies have produced guidelines for their diagnosis and treatment. This study aims to appraise the quality of the existing guidelines in this field.MethodsA systematic review of the Literature was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Scholar Google databases. Seven authors independently valued the quality of guidelines using the AGREE II instrument.ResultsThis study identified and included 9 guidelines of varying quality. The highest scoring guidelines were different considering each domain. NYSDOH ones gained the higher scoring in 2 domains. However, there was considerable variability across the studies and the various domains. The highest scoring domains were domain VI: Editorial Independence (median = 89% across all studies); IV: Clarity of Presentation (median = 61% across all studies) and domain I: Scope & Purpose (median = 59% across all studies). The lowest scores were observed in domain V: Applicability (22%) and domain III: Rigour of Development (29%). Only 2 of the 9 gained unanimous support for their use, whilst 5 guidelines were unanimously declared unsuitable for clinical use. The last 2 guidelines were considered beneficial only for limited purposes.Conclusions4 out of the 9 guidelines examined obtained moderate/good scores in various domains of the AGREE II tool. The review of the guidelines highlighted poor attention to stakeholder involvement and scarce care, mainly in the Rigour of development and Applicability of the guidelines. The AGREE II instrument could improve the drafting of new guidelines or help update published ones.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22095,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Innovation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15533506251362905\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506251362905\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506251362905","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Appraisal of the Current Guidelines for the Management of AIN Using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument.
AimAnal Intraepithelial Neoplasia has been a hot topic in colorectal surgery and many Scientific Societies have produced guidelines for their diagnosis and treatment. This study aims to appraise the quality of the existing guidelines in this field.MethodsA systematic review of the Literature was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Scholar Google databases. Seven authors independently valued the quality of guidelines using the AGREE II instrument.ResultsThis study identified and included 9 guidelines of varying quality. The highest scoring guidelines were different considering each domain. NYSDOH ones gained the higher scoring in 2 domains. However, there was considerable variability across the studies and the various domains. The highest scoring domains were domain VI: Editorial Independence (median = 89% across all studies); IV: Clarity of Presentation (median = 61% across all studies) and domain I: Scope & Purpose (median = 59% across all studies). The lowest scores were observed in domain V: Applicability (22%) and domain III: Rigour of Development (29%). Only 2 of the 9 gained unanimous support for their use, whilst 5 guidelines were unanimously declared unsuitable for clinical use. The last 2 guidelines were considered beneficial only for limited purposes.Conclusions4 out of the 9 guidelines examined obtained moderate/good scores in various domains of the AGREE II tool. The review of the guidelines highlighted poor attention to stakeholder involvement and scarce care, mainly in the Rigour of development and Applicability of the guidelines. The AGREE II instrument could improve the drafting of new guidelines or help update published ones.
期刊介绍:
Surgical Innovation (SRI) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal focusing on minimally invasive surgical techniques, new instruments such as laparoscopes and endoscopes, and new technologies. SRI prepares surgeons to think and work in "the operating room of the future" through learning new techniques, understanding and adapting to new technologies, maintaining surgical competencies, and applying surgical outcomes data to their practices. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).