Open AccessAppraisal of the Current Guidelines for Management of Malignant Left-Sided Colonic Obstruction Using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II Instrument
Author(s) -
Paschalis Gavriilidis,
Alan Askari,
Nicola de’Angelis,
Efstratios Gavriilidis,
James M. Wheeler,
Justin Davies
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
digestive surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.762
H-Index - 69
eISSN - 1421-9983
pISSN - 0253-4886
DOI - 10.1159/000514446
Subject(s) - medicine , nice , guideline , excellence , colorectal cancer , cancer , pathology , computer science , political science , law , programming language
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth leading cause of death with 1.4 million new cases occurring annually worldwide. High-quality clinical practice guidelines are needed to tailor high-quality individualized treatment. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the methodological quality of the current guidelines for the management of acute malignant left-sided colonic bowel obstruction. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was carried out using electronic databases. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument was used to assess the quality of each guideline. Results: Search results returned a total of 14 guidelines appropriate for assessment. Both domain I (scope and purpose) and domain VI (editorial independence) were assessed with the same median score of 83%. The lowest scoring domain was domain V (applicability), scoring only 43%. The 2 guidelines that had the highest score were the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), each scoring 100%. However, there were significant variations in terms of quality. The NICE and New Zealand guidelines were voted unanimously for use unchanged, whilst 8 other guidelines were voted for use with modifications. Conclusion: Variation in guideline quality in CRC is a concern despite some clearly excellent published guidelines. All guidelines score poorly when it comes to describing how the guidelines could be applied. Lack of patient participation in guideline development is also a shortcoming that requires urgent redress.