BACKGROUND: Many professional organizations help their members identify and use quality guidelines. Some of these efforts involve developing new guidelines, and others assess existing guidelines for their clinical usefulness. The American College of Surgeons Guidelines Program attempts to recognize useful surgical guidelines and develop research questions to help clarify existing clinical guidelines. We used existing guidelines about central venous access to develop a set of summary recommendations that could be used by practitioners to establish local best practices. STUDY DESIGN: A comprehensive literature search identified existing clinical guidelines for short-term central venous access. Two reviewers independently rated the guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. Highly scored guidelines were analyzed for content, and their recommendations were compiled into a summary table. The summary table was reviewed by an independent panel of experts for clinical utility. RESULTS: Thirty-two guidelines were identified, and 23 met inclusion criteria. The AGREE rating resulted in four guidelines that were strongly recommended and five that were recommended with alterations. Three comprehensive tables of recommendations were produced: procedural, maintenance, and infectious assessment. A panel of experts came to consensus agreement on the final format of the best practice recommendations, which included 30 summary recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Our process combined assessing existing guidelines methodology with expert opinion to produce a best practice list of guidelines that could be fashioned into local care routines by practicing physicians. The American College of Surgeons guidelines program believes this process will help validate the clinical utility of existing guidelines and identify areas needing further investigation to determine practical validity.
BACKGROUND: Many professional organizations help their members identify and use quality guidelines. Some of these efforts involve developing new guidelines, and others assess existing guidelines for their clinical usefulness. The American College of Surgeons Guidelines Program attempts to recognize useful surgical guidelines and develop research questions to help clarify existing clinical guidelines. We used existing guidelines about central venous access to develop a set of summary recommendations that could be used by practitioners to establish local best practices. STUDY DESIGN: A comprehensive literature search identified existing clinical guidelines for short-term central venous access. Two reviewers independently rated the guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. Highly scored guidelines were analyzed for content, and their recommendations were compiled into a summary table. The summary table was reviewed by an independent panel of experts for clinical utility. RESULTS: Thirty-two guidelines were identified, and 23 met inclusion criteria. The AGREE rating resulted in four guidelines that were strongly recommended and five that were recommended with alterations. Three comprehensive tables of recommendations were produced: procedural, maintenance, and infectious assessment. A panel of experts came to consensus agreement on the final format of the best practice recommendations, which included 30 summary recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Our process combined assessing existing guidelines methodology with expert opinion to produce a best practice list of guidelines that could be fashioned into local care routines by practicing physicians. The American College of Surgeons guidelines program believes this process will help validate the clinical utility of existing guidelines and identify areas needing further investigation to determine practical validity.
Authors: Allison Lipitz-Snyderman; Elena B Elkin; Coral L Atoria; Camelia S Sima; Andrew S Epstein; Victoria Blinder; Kent A Sepkowitz; Peter B Bach Journal: Med Care Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: J Braun; A Krause; M Aringer; G Burmester; F Bessler; J-M Engel; U Faubel; R Fischer-Betz; E Genth; E Gromnica-Ihle; B Hellmich; I Kötter; K Krüger; J Lakomek; H-M Lorenz; B Manger; E Märker-Hermann; K Minden; U Müller-Ladner; J Rautenstrauch; S Rehart; G Riemekasten; M Rudwaleit; W Rüther; G Schett; F Schuch; H Schulze-Koops; C Specker; S Wassenberg; D Wiek; A Zink; M Schneider Journal: Z Rheumatol Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 1.372
Authors: Maria Adrian; Ola Borgquist; Peter Bentzer; Jonas Åkeson; Martin Spångfors; Jonas Wrigstad; Anders Holmström; Rikard Linnér; Thomas Kander Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Michaela A Stoffer; Josef S Smolen; Anthony Woolf; Ales Ambrozic; Ailsa Bosworth; Loreto Carmona; Veronika Fialka-Moser; Estibaliz Loza; Pawel Olejnik; Ingemar F Petersson; Till Uhlig; Tanja A Stamm Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 19.103