Quality of critical care clinical practice guidelines involving pharmacotherapy recommendations
Name:
QualityofCriticalCarePharmacot ...
Size:
197.2Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Affiliation
Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona College of PharmacyIssue Date
2022-07
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Oxford University PressCitation
Edwards, C., Lam, J., Gardiner, J., & Erstad, B. L. (2022). Quality of critical care clinical practice guidelines involving pharmacotherapy recommendations. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy : AJHP : Official Journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 79(21), 1919–1924.Rights
© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2022. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the quality of critical care clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) involving pharmacotherapy recommendations. METHODS: A systematic electronic search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase for critical care CPGs published between 2012 and 2022 and involving pharmacotherapy recommendations. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument was employed to appraise CPG quality through independent assessment by 2 appraisers. RESULTS: Twenty-one CPGs were evaluated. The number of recommendations in each guideline ranged from 2 to 250, with a total of 1,604 recommendations. The number of strong (vs weak) recommendations in each guideline ranged from 0 to 31, with a total of 116 strong recommendations, or 7.23% of the total number of recommendations. There was at least 1 pharmacist author for 9 (43%) of the guidelines. The AGREE II domains for which mean quality scores of evaluated guidelines were highest were scope and purpose (0.88; 95% CI, 0.85-0.92), rigor of development (0.80; 95% CI, 0.77-0.83), clarity of presentation (0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.87), and editorial independence (0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.94), while those for which mean scores were lowest were stakeholder involvement (0.69; 95% CI, 0.63-0.75) and applicability (0.49; 95% CI, 0.43-0.55). Involvement of a pharmacist in CPG development was associated with significantly higher scoring for stakeholder involvement (P = 0.0356). CONCLUSION: Strong recommendations accounted for less than 10% of the recommendations in the evaluated CPGs. Moreover, there are concerns related to guideline applicability (ie, advice or tools for putting recommendations into practice) and stakeholder involvement (ie, inclusion of individuals from all relevant groups). It is important to involve pharmacists in CPGs with pharmacotherapy recommendations.Note
12 month embargo; published: 15 July 2022EISSN
1535-2900PubMed ID
35848948Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1093/ajhp/zxac193
