中心静脉导管临床指南和共识的质量评价  

Evaluation of clinical guidelines and consensus on the quality of central venous catheters

作　　者：王道新 刘楠 师泽元 李海云[1] 彭会珍[1] 赵文利[1] WANG Daoxin;LIU Nan;SHI Zeyuan;LI Haiyun;PENG Huizhen;ZHAO Wenli(Department of Central Catheter Room,Henan Provincial People's Hospital,Zhengzhou 450003,P.R.China;School of Nursing and Health,Henan University,Kaifeng 475004,P.R.China;School of Clinical Medicine,Henan University,Kaifeng 475004,P.R.China)

机构地区：[1]河南省人民医院中心导管室,郑州450003 [2]河南大学护理与健康学院,河南开封475004 [3]河南大学临床医学院,河南开封475004

出　　处：《中国循证医学杂志》2023年第8期955-962,共8页Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目(编号:81872584);河南省科技攻关项目(编号:212102310683)。

摘　　要：目的评价中心静脉导管临床指南和共识的方法学质量和报告质量。方法计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、Web of Science、CBM、WanFang Data和CNKI数据库,同时补充检索GIN、NICE、NGC和医脉通网站,搜集中心静脉导管相关的临床指南和共识,检索时限均从建库至2022年10月。由2位研究者独立筛选文献、提取资料并使用AGREEⅡ和RIGHT分别评价指南/共识的方法学质量和报告质量。结果共纳入中心静脉导管指南和共识34部。AGREEⅡ各领域平均得分为:范围和目的53.73%、参与人员39.26%、严谨性39.57%、清晰性46.76%、应用性30.23%和编辑独立性49.18%。RIGHT评价条目中报告率最高的是条目1a,1b,3,4(100.00%),其次是条目19a(97.05%),2、19b(94.11%),20(91.17%),7b、11a(88.23%),7a(85.29%)。其余条目报告率均在60%以下。亚组分析结果显示:指南类在AGREEⅡ的4个领域(制订严谨性、清晰性、应用性和编辑独立性)的得分和RIGHT平均得分均高于共识类。基于循证医学方法制订的指南和共识在AGREEⅡ的3个领域(制订严谨性、应用性和编辑独立性)得分均高于基于专家意见制订的指南和共识。国外指南和共识在AGREEⅡ的6个领域和RIGHT评分平均得分均高于国内指南和共识。结论国外指南共识在AGREEⅡ6个领域的平均得分和RIGHT的得分均高于国内指南共识。Objective To evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of clinical guidelines and consensus on central venous catheters.Methods The PubMed,EMbase,Web of Science,CBM,WanFang Data,CNKI databases and Guidelines International Network,National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence,National Guideline Clearinghouse,Medive.cn websites were searched to collect clinical guidelines and consensus related to central venous catheters.The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to October 2022.Two researchers independently screened the literature,extracted data and used evaluation tools AGREEⅡand RIGHT to evaluate the quality of the included studies.Results A total of 34 central venous catheter guidelines and consensus were included.The average score for each field of AGREE II was 53.73%for scope and purpose,39.26%for participants,39.57%for rigor,46.76%for clarity,30.23%for application and 49.18%for editorial independence.Items 1a,1b,3,and 4(100.00%)had the highest reporting rate in the RIGHT evaluation items,followed by items 19a(97.05%),2/19b(94.11%),20(91.17%),7b/11a(88.23%),and 7a(85.29%).The reporting rate of the remaining items was below 60%.Subgroup analysis results showed that the average score and RIGHT score of the guidance class in the four fields of AGREEⅡ(rigor,clarity,application and editorial independence)were higher than those of the consensus class.Guidelines and consensus formulated based on evidence-based medicine methods were higher than those formulated based on expert opinions or reviews in the three fields of AGREE II(rigor,application and editorial independence).The average scores of foreign guidelines and consensus in 6 fields and RIGHT scores of AGREEⅡwere higher than those of domestic guidelines and consensus.Conclusion The AGREEⅡof 6 fields average score and RIGHT score in foreign guidelines are higher than those in domestic guidelines.

关 键 词：临床指南 共识 中心静脉导管 AGREEⅡ RIGHT 

分 类 号：R45[医药卫生—治疗学]