Kairui Wan1,2, Hengrui Liang3, Guolin Yan1,2, Bangyu Zou1,2, Chuxin Huang1,2, Mei Jiang2. 1. Nanshan School, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 511436, China. 2. State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120, China. 3. Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Numerous evidence-based guidelines (EBGs) pertaining to ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) have been published by domestic and international organizations, but their qualities have not been reported. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed up to July 2018 for relevant guidelines. Guidelines were eligible for inclusion if they incorporated recommendation statements for prevention and/or management in adults or children with VAP and were developed on a systematic evidence-based method. Four reviewers evaluated each guideline using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument, which comprises 23 items organized into six domains in addition to two overall items. RESULTS: Thirteen EBGs were identified for review. An overall high degree of agreement among reviewers was reached [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), 0.885; 95% CI, 0.862-0.905] during their review. The scores (mean, range) for the six AGREE domains were: scope and purpose (61%, 51-74%), stakeholder involvement (36%, 18-68%), rigor of development (41%, 22-59%), clarity and presentation (56%, 47-71%), applicability (38%, 21-59%) and editorial independence (50%, 0-77%). Only two EBGs (15.4%) were rated "recommended" for clinical practice. Approximately 86% of recommendations were based on moderate or low levels of evidence (levels B-D were 46.2%, 19.0%, and 21.2%, respectively). The recommendations for prevention and management of VAP were similar among the different EBGs. CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of the identified EBGs pertaining to VAP was classified as moderate. The management of VAP varied by guideline. More high-quality evidence is needed to improve guideline recommendations.
BACKGROUND: Numerous evidence-based guidelines (EBGs) pertaining to ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) have been published by domestic and international organizations, but their qualities have not been reported. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed up to July 2018 for relevant guidelines. Guidelines were eligible for inclusion if they incorporated recommendation statements for prevention and/or management in adults or children with VAP and were developed on a systematic evidence-based method. Four reviewers evaluated each guideline using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument, which comprises 23 items organized into six domains in addition to two overall items. RESULTS: Thirteen EBGs were identified for review. An overall high degree of agreement among reviewers was reached [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), 0.885; 95% CI, 0.862-0.905] during their review. The scores (mean, range) for the six AGREE domains were: scope and purpose (61%, 51-74%), stakeholder involvement (36%, 18-68%), rigor of development (41%, 22-59%), clarity and presentation (56%, 47-71%), applicability (38%, 21-59%) and editorial independence (50%, 0-77%). Only two EBGs (15.4%) were rated "recommended" for clinical practice. Approximately 86% of recommendations were based on moderate or low levels of evidence (levels B-D were 46.2%, 19.0%, and 21.2%, respectively). The recommendations for prevention and management of VAP were similar among the different EBGs. CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of the identified EBGs pertaining to VAP was classified as moderate. The management of VAP varied by guideline. More high-quality evidence is needed to improve guideline recommendations.
Authors: Wendy Lim; Donald M Arnold; Veronika Bachanova; Richard L Haspel; Rachel P Rosovsky; Andrei R Shustov; Mark A Crowther Journal: Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program Date: 2008
Authors: Marcos I Restrepo; Antonio Anzueto; Alejandro C Arroliga; Bekele Afessa; Mark J Atkinson; Ngoc J Ho; Regina Schinner; Ronald L Bracken; Marin H Kollef Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Peter Dodek; Sean Keenan; Deborah Cook; Daren Heyland; Michael Jacka; Lori Hand; John Muscedere; Debra Foster; Nav Mehta; Richard Hall; Christian Brun-Buisson Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2004-08-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Coleman Rotstein; Gerald Evans; Abraham Born; Ronald Grossman; R Bruce Light; Sheldon Magder; Barrie McTaggart; Karl Weiss; George G Zhanel Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: R G Masterton; A Galloway; G French; M Street; J Armstrong; E Brown; J Cleverley; P Dilworth; C Fry; A D Gascoigne; Alan Knox; Dilip Nathwani; Robert Spencer; Mark Wilcox Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2008-04-29 Impact factor: 5.790