Quality appraisal of clinical guidelines for surgical site infection prevention: A systematic review

View/ Open
File version
Version of Record (VoR)
Author(s)
Gillespie, Brigid M
Bull, Claudia
Walker, Rachel
Lin, Frances
Roberts, Shelley
Chaboyer, Wendy
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2018
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background:
Surgical site infections (SSI) occur in up to 10% of surgeries. Wound care practices to prevent
infections are guided by Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), yet their contribution to
improving patient outcomes relies on their quality and adoption in practice. We critically evaluated
the quality of CPGs for SSI prevention during pre-, intra- and post-operative phases
of care.
Methods:
We systematically reviewed the literature from 1990±2018 using the Cochrane Library,
CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest databases and five guidelines repositories. We
extracted characteristics of each guideline using purposely-developed ...
View more >Background: Surgical site infections (SSI) occur in up to 10% of surgeries. Wound care practices to prevent infections are guided by Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), yet their contribution to improving patient outcomes relies on their quality and adoption in practice. We critically evaluated the quality of CPGs for SSI prevention during pre-, intra- and post-operative phases of care. Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature from 1990±2018 using the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest databases and five guidelines repositories. We extracted characteristics of each guideline using purposely-developed data collection tools. We assessed overall quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. Results: Combined searches of databases and repositories yielded 5,910 citations. Of these, we reviewed 215 full text documents. The final sample included 15 documents: 6 complete CPGs, 3 CPG updates, and 6 supplementary documents. The overall %mean scores across AGREE II domains for CPGs were: 1) scope and purpose (%mean ± SD = 86.3±23.5); 2) stakeholder involvement (%mean ± SD = 64±31.0); 3) rigour of development (%mean ± SD = 68.7±30.6); 4) clarity and presentation (%mean ± SD = 88.5±16.7); 5) applicability (%mean ± SD = 44±30.2); and, 5) editorial independence (%mean ± SD = 61±37.6). Based on individual AGREE II domains and overall scores, we appraised 4 out of 6 CPGs (inclusive of updates) as ªrecommendedº for use in practice. Overall agreement among appraisers was excellent (ICC 0.86 [95%CI 0.73±0.94] - 0.98 [95%CI 0.96±0.99]; p <0.001).
View less >
View more >Background: Surgical site infections (SSI) occur in up to 10% of surgeries. Wound care practices to prevent infections are guided by Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), yet their contribution to improving patient outcomes relies on their quality and adoption in practice. We critically evaluated the quality of CPGs for SSI prevention during pre-, intra- and post-operative phases of care. Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature from 1990±2018 using the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest databases and five guidelines repositories. We extracted characteristics of each guideline using purposely-developed data collection tools. We assessed overall quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. Results: Combined searches of databases and repositories yielded 5,910 citations. Of these, we reviewed 215 full text documents. The final sample included 15 documents: 6 complete CPGs, 3 CPG updates, and 6 supplementary documents. The overall %mean scores across AGREE II domains for CPGs were: 1) scope and purpose (%mean ± SD = 86.3±23.5); 2) stakeholder involvement (%mean ± SD = 64±31.0); 3) rigour of development (%mean ± SD = 68.7±30.6); 4) clarity and presentation (%mean ± SD = 88.5±16.7); 5) applicability (%mean ± SD = 44±30.2); and, 5) editorial independence (%mean ± SD = 61±37.6). Based on individual AGREE II domains and overall scores, we appraised 4 out of 6 CPGs (inclusive of updates) as ªrecommendedº for use in practice. Overall agreement among appraisers was excellent (ICC 0.86 [95%CI 0.73±0.94] - 0.98 [95%CI 0.96±0.99]; p <0.001).
View less >
Journal Title
PLoS One
Copyright Statement
© The Author(s) 2018. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Note
This publication has been entered into Griffith Research Online as an Advanced Online Version.
Subject
Acute care