Advanced Search

Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine >

2024 , Vol. 44 >Issue 3: 609 - 619

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20240402.002

Literature Research

Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review

  • Yuhuang WANG ,
  • Le ZHANG ,
  • Zhengshan ZHANG ,
  • Zhi YAO ,
  • Xiyao LI ,
  • Luying SUN ,
  • Xing LIAO
Expand
  • 1 Department of Nephropathy and Endocrine, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100010, China
    2 Centre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100010, China
    3 Department of Endocrine One Zone, Fangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 102400, China

Received date: 2023-02-22

  Accepted date: 2023-07-15

  Online published: 2024-04-08

Fold

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in the context of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) and determine whether any factors affect the quality.

METHODS: We searched eight databases along with five international and national organizations to develop or archive guidelines from their inception to July 2023, with an additional search of medlive.cn. And the authoritative organizations related to nephrology. CPGs and consensus statements created using direct differential diagnosis or therapy for DKD were included without language restrictions. Their quality was evaluated by four reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Ⅱ (AGREE Ⅱ) instrument. Along with the item and domain scores, the guideline was also allocated an overall quality score, which ranged from 1 (lowest possible quality) to 7 (highest possible quality). Moreover, an overall recommendation for use was also assigned (“recommended”, “recommended with modifications” or “not recommended”).

RESULTS: A total of 16 CPGs were included, of which 14 were from Asia and the remaining two from Europe. These two CPGs were updated in the third version. Six CPGs were recommended for use because their primary domains scored in the medium or high category. Furthermore, five CPGs were recommended with modifications as the stakeholder involvement, applicability, and editorial independence domains were evaluated as low categories. In all domains, the lowest average score was for rigour of development (33%), followed by application (36%), and stakeholder involvement (51%). The highest average score was for scope and purpose (79%), followed by clarity of presentation (75%). None of the CPGs considered the patient's viewpoint, and six of 16 CPGs did not use any grading system to translate the evidence into recommendations. Additionally, only three of 16 CPGs shared search strategy, and eight of 16 CPGs did not declare a funding source.

CONCLUSIONS: According to the AGREE II evaluation, more than one in four CPGs for DKD had poor methodological quality. Enhanced efforts are needed to advance the rigour of development, application, and editorial independence of DKD guideline panels for most guidelines. Stakeholders, CPG developers, and CPG users should consider methodological quality while choosing CPGs, and interpret and implement their issued suggestions.

Key words： diabetic nephropathies; practice guideline; appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II; quality assessment; systematic review

Cite this article

Yuhuang WANG , Le ZHANG , Zhengshan ZHANG , Zhi YAO , Xiyao LI , Luying SUN , Xing LIAO . Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 2024 , 44(3) : 609 -619 . DOI: 10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20240402.002

References

1. Murphy D, MCCullon EC, Lin F, et al. Centers for disease control and prevention chronic kidney disease surveillance team. Trends in prevalence of chronic kidney disease in the United States. Ann Intern Med 2016; 165: 473-81.
2. Tuttle KR, Bakris GL, Bilous RW, et al. Diabetic kidney disease: a report from an ADA Consensus Conference. Diabetes care 2014; 37: 2864-83.
3. Saran R, Robinson B, Abbott KC, et al. EUS renal data system 2016 annual data report: epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis 2017; 69: A7-8.
4. World Health Organization. WHO handbook for guideline development. 2nd ed: World Health Organization. World Health Organization online, 2014-12-18, cited Chapter 16: 201-214. Available from URL: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789241548960
5. Nair R, Aggarwal R, Khanna D. Methods of formal consensus in classification/diagnostic criteria and guideline development. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2011; 41: 95-105.
6. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 383-94.
7. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care 2003; 12: 18-23
8. Chen Y, Yang K, Maru?ic A, et al. A reporting tool for practice guidelines in health care: the RIGHT statement. Ann Intern Med 2017; 166: 128-32.
9. Coronado Daza J, Vernooij RWM, Salas K, Osorio D, Urrútia Cuchí G. Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: a systematic review. BMC Nephrol 2019; 20: 192.
10. Sun Y, Gao Y, Chen J, et al. Evidence mapping of recommendations on diagnosis and therapeutic strategies for diabetes foot: an international review of 22 guidelines. Metabolism 2019; 100: 153956.
11. Smyth A, Jenkins M, Dunham M, Kutzer Y, Taheri S, Whitehead L. Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines to identify recommendations for sleep in type 2 diabetes mellitus management. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2020; 170: 108532.
12. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and Meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6: e1000097.
13. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. AGREE Ⅱ: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. Can Med Assoc J 2010; 182: E839-42.
14. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74.
15. Andrade R, Pereira R, van Cingel R, Staal JB, Espregueira-Mendes J. How should clinicians rehabilitate patients after ACL reconstruction? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with a focus on quality appraisal (AGREE Ⅱ). Br J Sports Med 2020; 54: 512-9.
16. Isaac A, Saginur M, Hartling L, Robinson JL. Quality of reporting and evidence in American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines. Pediatrics 2013; 131: 732-8.
17. Lin I, Wiles L, Waller R, et al. What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? Eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review. Br J Sports Med 2020; 54: 79-86.
18. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. Development of the AGREE Ⅱ, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application. Can Med Assoc J 2010; 182: E472-8.
19. Diabetes Society of China Association of Chinese Medicine. Traditional Chinese Medicine diagnosis and treatment standards for diabetic kidney disease. Shi Jie Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Za Zhi 2011; 6: 548-52.
20. Professional Committee of Endocrinology and Metabolism. Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Doctor Branch, Chinese Medical Doctor Association. Combining disease and syndrome guideline for diagnosis and treatment of diabetic kidney disease. Zhong Yi Za Zhi 2022; 63: 190-7.
21. Microvascular Complications Group of Chinese Diabetes Society. Clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of diabetic kidney disease in China. Zhong Hua Tang Niao Bing Za Zhi 2021, 3: 762-84.
22. Chinese Society of Endocrinology. Clinical diagnosis for adults with diabetic kidney disease: a Chinese expert consensus. Zhong Hua Nei Fen Mi Dai Xie Za Zhi 2015; 31: 379-85.
23. Jiang SM, Fang JY, Li WG. Multidisciplinary expert consensus on diagnosis, treatment and management of diabetic kidney disease. Zhong Guo Lin Chuang Yi Sheng Za Zhi 2020; 48: 522-7.
24. Diabetic Kidney Disease Cooperative Group of Peking University Health Science Center. Expert consensus on the diagnosis and management of diabetic kidney disease. Zhong Guo Yi Xue Za Zhi 2020; 100: 247-60.
25. Zhang JQ, Su BH, Zhang J, Guo XH, Expert Consensus Group for Early Prediction and Diagnosis of Diabetic Kidney Disease. Expert Consensus on early prediction and diagnosis of diabetic kidney disease. Zhong Hua Nei Ke Za Zhi 2021; 60: 522-32.
26. Expert Group of Chinese Society of Nephrology. Chinese guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of diabetic kidney disease. Zhong Hua Shen Zang Bing Za Zhi 2021; 37: 255-304.
27. Chinese Society of Nephrology. Expert consensus on diagnosis, prognosis assessment and application of biomarkers in diabetic kidney disease. Zhong Hua Shen Zang Bing Za Zhi 2022, 38: 771-84.
28. Chinese Society of Nephrology. Chinese guidelines for renal replacement therapy in diabetic end-stage renal disease. Zhong Hua Shen Zang Bing Za Zhi 2022; 38: 62-75.
29. Wang B, Wang YH, Liu F, Wu ST. Expert consensus statement on clinical application of Chinese patent medicines for patients with diabetic kidney disease in clinical practice. Tianjin Zhong Yi Yao 2022; 39: 854-61.
30. Chinese Society of Endocrinology, Expert consensue on medical nutrition therapy for adult diabetic kidney diseases in China. Zhong Hua Nei Fen Mi Dai Xie Za Zhi 2022, 38: 927-936.
31. Chinese Society of General Practice, Writing Group of Guideline for Primary Care of Diabetes Kidney Disease in China. Guideline for primary care of diabetes kidney disease in China. Zhong Hua Quan Ke Yi Shi Za Zhi 2023, 22: 146-57.
32. Sourij H, Edlinger R, Prischl FC, et al. Diabetic kidney disease (Update 2019): Position paper of the Austrian Diabetes Association and the Austrian Society for Nephrology. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2019; 131: 151-63.
33. Liew A, Bavanandan S, Prasad N, et al. Asian pacific society of nephrology clinical practice guideline in diabetic kidney disease. Nephrology (Carlton) 2020; 25 Suppl 2: 12-45.
34. Pugliese G, Penno G, Natali A, et al. Diabetic kidney disease: new clinical and therapeutic issues. Joint position statement of the Italian Diabetes Society and the Italian Society of Nephrology on “The natural history of diabetic kidney disease and treatment of hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes and impaired renal function”. J Nephrol 2020 ; 33(1): 9-35.
35. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Diabetes Work Group. KDIGO 2020 clinical practice guideline for diabetes management in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int 98 2020; S1-115.
36. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Diabetes Work Group. KDIGO 2022 clinical practice guideline for diabetes management in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int, 102 2022; S1-127.
37. American Diabetes Association. 11. Microvascular complications and foot care: standards of medical care in diabetes-2020. Diabetes Care 2020; 43: S135-51.
38. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes--2014. Diabetes care 2014; 37 Suppl 1: S14-80.
39. Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Solà I, et al. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care 2010; 19: e58.
40. Institute of Medicine Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice G. In: Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E, editors. National Academies Press serial online, Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. 2011. Cited 2023-09-27; Available from URL: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/13058/chapter/1.
41. Classen DC, Mermel LA. Specialty society clinical practice guide-lines: time for evolution or revolution? JAMA 2015; 314: 871-2.
42. Schünemann HJ, Mustafa R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE Guidelines: 16. GRADE evidence to decision frameworks for tests in clinical practice and public health. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 76: 89-98.
43. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ 2017; 358.
44. van der Ham AJ, van Erp N, Broerse JE. Monitoring and evaluation of patient involvement in clinical practice guideline development: lessons from the Multidisciplinary Guideline for Employment and Severe Mental Illness, the Netherlands. Health Expect 2016; 19: 471-82.
45. Selva A, Sanabria AJ, Peque?o S, et al. Incorporating patients' views in guideline development: a systematic review of guidance documents. J Clin Epidemiol 2017; 88: 102-12.
46. Armstrong MJ, Mullins CD, Gronseth GS, Gagliardi AR. Impact of patient involvement on clinical practice guideline development: a parallel group study. Implement Sci 2018; 13: 55.
47. Lomas J. Improving research dissemination and uptake in the health sector: beyond the sound of one hand clapping. Hamilton: Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis 1997.
48. Shiffman RN, Dixon J, Brandt C, et al. The GuideLine Implementability Appraisal (GLIA): development of an instrument to identify obstacles to guideline implementation. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2005; 5: 23.
49. Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM. How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implement Sci 2011; 6: 26.
50. China Association of Chinese Medicine. Clinical application evaluation index system of clinical diagnosis and treatment guidelines of Traditional Chinese Medicine (2012). Available from: http://www.doc88.com/p-3933713266369.html
51. Li H, Xie XL, Wang YY, Cai HY, Chen YL, Lu CJ. Implementation and evaluation of revised clinical practice guideline of Traditional Chinese Medicine (integrated traditional Chinese and Western Medicine). Zhong Hua Zhong Yi Yao Za Zhi 2016, 31: 5119-23.
52. Treweek S, Oxman AD, Alderson P, et al. Developing and evaluating communication strategies to support informed Decisions and Practice Based on Evidence (DECIDE): protocol and preliminary results. Implement Sci 2013; 8: 6.
53. Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC, Bhattacharyya OK; Guideline Implementation Research and Application Network. A framework of the desirable features of guideline implementation tools (GItools): Delphi survey and assessment of GItools. Implement Sci 2014; 9: 98.
54. Brouwers MC, Makarski J, Kastner M, Hayden L, Bhattacharyya O, Team G-MR. The Guideline Implementability Decision Excellence Model (GUIDE-M): a mixed methods approach to create an international resource to advance the practice guideline field. Implement Sci 2015; 10: 36.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉