«ÉÏһƪ/Previous Article|±¾ÆÚĿ¼/Table of Contents|ÏÂһƪ/Next Article»

¡¶ÖÐÒ½Õý¹Ç¡·[ISSN:1001-6015/CN:41-1162/R]

¾í:

µÚ33¾í

ÆÚÊý:

2021Äê06ÆÚ

Ò³Âë:

36-41

À¸Ä¿:

ÎÄÏ×Ñо¿

³ö°æÈÕÆÚ:

2021-06-20

ÎÄÕÂÐÅÏ¢/Info

Title:

Quality evaluation of Chinese clinical guidelines/consensus for knee osteoarthritis based on AGREE¢ò

×÷Õß:

Ò¶ºãÁ¦¹; ¼Ö³¯Ðñ¹; ¸µ·±Óþ²; ËÎÃθè³; ³ÂÕ×¾ü¹; ³ÂÎÀºâ¹

1.±±¾©ÖÐÒ½Ò©´óѧµÚÈý¸½ÊôÒ½Ôº,±±¾© 100029; 2.¹óÖÝÖÐÒ½Ò©´óѧ,¹óÖÝ ¹óÑô 550025; 3.ÖйúÖÐÒ½¿ÆѧԺÍû¾©Ò½Ôº,±±¾© 100102

Author(s):

YE Hengli¹; JIA Zhaoxu¹; FU Fanyu²; SONG Mengge³; CHEN Zhaojun¹; CHEN Weiheng¹

1.The Third Affiliated Hospital of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine,Beijing 100029,China 2.Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Guiyang 550025,Guizhou,China 3.Wangjing Hospital of CACMS,Beijing 100102,China

¹Ø¼ü´Ê:

¹Ç¹Ø½ÚÑ×; Ï¥;  Ö¸ÄÏ;  ¹²Ê¶;  ÁÙ´²Ö¸ÄÏÑо¿ÓëÆÀ¼Ûϵͳ¢ò

Keywords:

osteoarthritis; knee;  guidebooks;  consensus;  AGREE¢ò

ÕªÒª:

Ä¿µÄ:ÆÀ¼Û¹úÄÚÏ¥¹Ç¹Ø½ÚÑ×(knee osteoarthritis,KOA)Ö¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶µÄÖÊÁ¿¡£·½·¨:Ó¦ÓüÆËã»ú¼ìË÷ÖйúÖªÍø¡¢Íò·½Êý¾Ý¿â¡¢Î¬ÆÕÍø¡¢ÖйúÉúÎïҽѧÎÄÏ×Êý¾Ý¿â¡¢Ò½ÂöͨÍø,ËѼ¯¹úÄÚ·¢±íµÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶,¼ìË÷ʱÏÞ¾ùΪ½¨¿âÖÁ2020Äê12ÔÂ31ÈÕ¡£ÓÉ3λÑо¿Õ߶ÀÁ¢É¸Ñ¡ÎÄÏס¢ÌáÈ¡Êý¾Ýºó,ʹÓÃÁÙ´²Ö¸ÄÏÑо¿ÓëÆÀ¼Ûϵͳ¢ò(appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation¢ò,AGREE¢ò)¶ÔÄÉÈëµÄÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶½øÐÐÖÊÁ¿ÆÀ¼Û¡£½á¹û:¹²ÄÉÈë13ƪKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶,ÔÚAGREE¢òµÄ·¶Î§ÓëÄ¿µÄ¡¢²ÎÓëÈËÔ±¡¢Öƶ¨ÑϽ÷ÐÔ¡¢±í´ïÇåÎúÐÔ¡¢Ó¦ÓÃÐÔ¼°±à¼­¶ÀÁ¢ÐÔ6¸öÁìÓòµÄÆÀ·Ö·Ö±ðΪ(64.25¡À17.61)%¡¢(40.31¡À18.05)%¡¢(24.04¡À18.64)%¡¢(57.27¡À21.83)%¡¢(15.81¡À15.04)%¡¢(32.48¡À27.30)%¡£3λÑо¿ÕßÆÀ¼ÛµÄ×ÜÌåÒ»ÖÂÐԽϺÃ[ICC=0.91,95%CI(0.89,0.92)]¡£Î÷Ò½ÀàKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶µÄ¸÷ÁìÓòÆÀ·Ö¾ù¸ßÓÚÖйú´«Í³Ò½Ñ§ÀàKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶; ³ýÖƶ¨ÑϽ÷ÐÔºÍÓ¦ÓÃÐÔÁìÓòÍâ,ÓÉÐÐҵѧ»á×éÖ¯Öƶ¨µÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶µÄÆäËûÁìÓòÆÀ·Ö¾ù¸ßÓÚÓÉ¿ÎÌâר¼Ò×éÖƶ¨µÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶; ²ÉÓÃÑ­Ö¤½áºÏ¹²Ê¶·½·¨Öƶ¨µÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶µÄ¸÷ÁìÓòÆÀ·Ö¾ù¸ßÓÚÒÔ¹²Ê¶ºÍ¹²Ê¶(ÓÐÖ¤¾Ý)·½·¨Öƶ¨µÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶; Óлù½ð×ÊÖúµÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶Ôڱ༭¶ÀÁ¢ÐÔÁìÓòµÄÆÀ·ÖÃ÷ÏÔ¸ßÓÚÎÞ»ù½ð×ÊÖúµÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶,µ«ÔÚÆäËûÁìÓò²¢ÎÞÃ÷ÏÔÓÅÊÆ; ³ýÓ¦ÓÃÐÔÁìÓòÍâ,2018Äê¼°ÒÔºó·¢±íµÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶ÔÚÆäËûÁìÓòµÄÆÀ·Ö¾ù¸ü¸ß,ÇÒ2020Äê·¢±íµÄKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶ÔÚ¸÷ÁìÓòµÄÆÀ·Ö¾ùΪ×î¸ß¡£½áÂÛ:¹úÄÚÏÖÓÐKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶µÄ×ÜÌåÖÊÁ¿²»¸ß,ÌرðÊÇÖйú´«Í³Ò½Ñ§ÀàKOAÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶,µ«×ÜÌåÖÊÁ¿ÔÚÖð²½Ìá¸ß; ½ñºóÖƶ¨»ò¸üÐÂÏà¹ØÖ¸ÄϺ͹²Ê¶Ê±,ÐèÔÚ·½·¨Ñ§ÉϽøÒ»²½Ìá¸ß,ÓÈÆäÊÇÖƶ¨ÑϽ÷ÐÔºÍÓ¦ÓÃÐÔ·½Ãæ¡£

Abstract:

Objective:To evaluate the methodological quality of clinical guidelines/consensus for knee osteoarthritis(KOA)in China.Methods:The KOA clinical guidelines/consensus that published at home included from database establishing to December 31,2020 were retrieved from the China National Knowledge Internet,Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform,Vip Database,Chinese biomedical literature database and medlive.cn through computer.The articles were screened and the information was extracted independently by three researchers.The methodological quality of included KOA clinical guidelines/consensus was evaluated by using appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation¢ò(AGREE¢ò).Results:Thirteen KOA clinical guidelines/consensus were included in the final appraisal,and their scores in the six domains,including the scope and purpose of AGREE¢ò,participants,rigor of development,clarity of presentation,applicability and editorial independence,were scored as 64.25¡À17.61,40.31¡À18.05,24.04¡À18.64,57.27¡À21.83,15.81¡À15.04 and 32.48¡À27.30% respectively.The consistency of the appraisal was good among the three researchers(ICC=0.91,95%CI(0.89,0.92)).The scores of KOA clinical guidelines/consensus in each domains were higher in western medicine compared with the counterparts in traditional Chinese medicine(TCM),and the scores of KOA clinical guidelines/consensus formulated by Industry Associations in all domains except for the rigor of development and applicability were higher in contrast to those by project expert groups.The scores of KOA clinical guidelines/consensus developed by the evidence-based and consensus approaches in all domains exceeded that of the ones by consensus and consensus(with evidence)-based approaches.Compared with the non-funded KOA clinical guidelines/consensus,the funded ones exhibited an apparently high score in editorial independence,whereas no obvious advantages in other domains.The KOA clinical guidelines/consensus published in 2018 or later showed higher scores in all domains except for the applicability,particularly those published in 2020 displayed the highest scores across all domains.Conclusion:The overall quality of the existing KOA clinical guidelines/consensus,especially those in TCM,remains to be improved even though they have kept being modified.In subsequent formulation or updating,it should be further improved in the quality of methodology,especially in the rigor of development and applicability.

±¸×¢/Memo

±¸×¢/Memo:

»ù½ðÏîÄ¿:¹ú¼ÒÖÐÒ½Ò©¹ÜÀí¾ÖÖØ´óÒÉÄѼ²²¡ÖÐÎ÷Ò½ÁÙ´²Ð­×÷ÊÔµãÏîÄ¿(201803190106)
ͨѶ×÷Õß:³ÂÕ×¾ü E-mail:zhaojunchen66@126.com
³ÂÎÀºâ E-mail:drchenweiheng@bucm.edu.cn

³£Óù¦ÄÜ

¸üÐÂÈÕÆÚ/Last Update: 2021-12-20