《中国康复理论与实践》 ›› 2020, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (2): 144-149.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2020.02.003

• 专题 康复指南研究:理论架构、方法体系、发展状况与质量评价 • 上一篇    下一篇

康复临床实践指南:方法学质量研究

魏莉莉1,2,3,李浩冉4,5,王子君2,3,6,7,黄嘉骏8,周奇3,6,7,8,黄天相8,陈佩瑶8,李兴杰1,陈耀龙2,3,6,7(),杨克虎2,3,6,7()   

  1. 1.兰州大学第二医院,甘肃兰州市 730000
    2.兰州大学基础医学院循证医学中心,甘肃兰州市 730000
    3.甘肃省循证医学与临床转化重点实验室,甘肃兰州市 730000
    4.世界卫生组织国际分类家族中国合作中心,北京市 100068
    5.中国ICF研究院/潍坊医学院,山东潍坊市 261053
    6.世界卫生组织指南实施与知识转化合作中心,甘肃兰州市730000
    7.GRADE中国中心,甘肃兰州市 730000
    8.兰州大学第一临床医学院,甘肃兰州市 730000
  • 收稿日期:2020-02-06 修回日期:2020-02-14 出版日期:2020-02-25 发布日期:2020-03-19
  • 通讯作者: 陈耀龙,杨克虎 E-mail:chenyaolong21@vip.163.com;kehuyangebm2006@126.com
  • 作者简介:魏莉莉(1988-),女,藏族,甘肃兰州市人,硕士,主要研究方向:循证医学。|李浩冉(1993-),男,汉族,陕西汉中市人,主要研究方向:公共卫生健康大数据和ICF。
  • 基金资助:
    1.国家社科基金重大项目(19ZDA142);2.甘肃省循证医学与临床转化重点实验室创新基金项目(CXJJ2019002)

Clinical Practice Guidelines of Rehabilitation: Methodological Quality

WEI Li-li1,2,3,LI Hao-ran4,5,WANG Zi-jun2,3,6,7,HUANG Jia-jun8,ZHOU Qi3,6,7,8,HUANG Tian-xiang8,CHEN Pei-yao8,LI Xing-jie1,CHEN Yao-long2,3,6,7(),YANG Ke-hu2,3,6,7()   

  1. 1. the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
    2. Evidence-based Medicine Center of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
    3. Gansu Key Laboratory of Evidence-based Medicine and Clinical Transformation, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
    4. WHO-FIC Collaborating Center in China, Beijing 100068, China
    5. China Academy of ICF/Weifang Medical University, Weifang, Shandong 261053, China
    6. WHO Collaborating Centre for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
    7. Chinese GRADE Center, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
    8. the First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China
  • Received:2020-02-06 Revised:2020-02-14 Published:2020-02-25 Online:2020-03-19
  • Contact: CHEN Yao-long,YANG Ke-hu E-mail:chenyaolong21@vip.163.com;kehuyangebm2006@126.com
  • Supported by:
    Major Project of the National Social Science Fund(19ZDA142);Gansu Key Laboratory of Evidence-based Medicine and Clinical Translation Innovation Fund(CXJJ2019002)

摘要:

目的 评价康复临床实践指南的方法学质量。方法 检索PubMed、EMBASE、万方数据库、中国知网(CNKI)和中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)及医脉通、英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)、美国国立指南文库(NGC)、苏格兰校际指南协作网(SIGN)、世界卫生组织(WHO)、国际指南协作网(GIN)网站已公开发表的与康复医学相关的临床实践指南,检索时限均为从建库至2020年1月11日。由2名研究人员独立筛选文献并交叉核对,基于指南研究与评价(AGREE) Ⅱ工具对纳入的临床实践指南的方法学质量进行评价。 结果 共纳入指南84篇,其中英文67篇,中文17篇。基于AGREE Ⅱ工具的整体评价平均得分为48.1%,其中国外指南为49.9%,国内指南为40.7%。AGREE Ⅱ 6个领域中,除应用性外,国外指南平均得分均高于国内指南(| Z| > 2.034, P < 0.05);AGREE Ⅱ发布后,表达清晰性和编辑独立性的评分均高于发布前( Z > 2.130, P < 0.05);得分由高到低依次是范围和目的(41.6%)、表达清晰性(39.9%)、参与人员(24.5%)、制订严谨性(23.2%)、编辑独立性(15.5%)和应用性(12.9%)。 结论 国内外康复临床实践指南的方法学质量有待提高。建议未来康复指南制订者严格按照AGREE Ⅱ标准规范化制订并撰写相关指南,重视指南制订过程中的内容和全面性,从而更好地提升指南的质量。

关键词: 康复, 临床实践指南, 指南研究与评价 Ⅱ, 指南评价

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines of rehabilitation using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II.Methods Clinical practice guidelines of rehabilitation were searched in databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Wanfang database, CNKI, China Biology Medicine disc and related websites from medlive.cn, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, World Health Organization, and Guidelines International Network from establishment to January 11, 2020. Two researchers reviewed literatures and assessed the methodological quality of the guidelines independently by using AGREE II; any disagreements needed to be discussed in a consensus meeting.Results A total of 84 guidelines were included in the study, with 67 foreign guidelines and 17 domestic guidelines. The average score rate for all the guidelines was 48.1%, in which 49.9% for the foreign guidelines and 40.7% for the domestic guidelines. In the six areas of AGREE II, the average score rate of the foreign guidelines was higher than that of domestic ones (|Z| > 2.034, P < 0.05), expect applicability; the average score rate of clarity and independence improved with the launch of AGREE Ⅱ ( Z > 2.130, P < 0.05). The average scores rate ranged from high to low followed as range and purpose (41.6%), clarity (39.9%), participants (24.5%), rigor (23.2%), independence (15.5%) and applicability (12.9%). Conclusion Clinical practice guidelines of rehabilitation is mainly of low quality by AGREE II. Guideline developers need to work after AGREE Ⅱ standard in the future.

Key words: rehabilitation, clinical practice guidelines, Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II, guideline evaluation

中图分类号: