The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema
Background: Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Lymphatic research and biology 2023-10, Vol.21 (5), p.469-478 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 478 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 469 |
container_title | Lymphatic research and biology |
container_volume | 21 |
creator | Dolgoy, Naomi D Al Onazi, Mona M Parkinson, Joanna F Gudmundsson, Haukur Radke, Lori L Dennett, Liz Campbell, Kristin L Harris, Susan R Keast, David McNeely, Margaret L |
description | Background:
Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context.
Methods and Results:
We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy.
Conclusions:
No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1089/lrb.2022.0090 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2799829358</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2799829358</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c293t-dffba1b5132a4306691162d18abc6159ddd26061555de69475254af1f03224143</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMotlaPXiVHL1vzsdndHGvRKhSUUs8hu5mlkeyHye6h_94sVa_CwLwMD-_Ag9AtJUtKCvngfLlkhLElIZKcoTkVIk8KUYjzKXOZZIWgM3QVwieJGCXsEs14TuIwOUe7_QHwqu-9tkE73NV47Wxrq5jfva4GWwHejNZAvELAdefxowcdBrzWbQU-2YHTAxi8PTb9AQw0-hpd1NoFuPnZC_Tx_LRfvyTbt83rerVNKib5kJi6LjUtBeVMp5xkmaQ0Y4YWuqwyKqQxhmUkJiEMZDLNBROprmlNOGMpTfkC3Z96e999jRAG1dhQgXO6hW4MiuVSFvGVKCKanNDKdyF4qFXvbaP9UVGiJo0qalSTRjVpjPzdT_VYNmD-6F9vEeAnYDrrtnUWSvDDP7XfVPJ9XA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2799829358</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Dolgoy, Naomi D ; Al Onazi, Mona M ; Parkinson, Joanna F ; Gudmundsson, Haukur ; Radke, Lori L ; Dennett, Liz ; Campbell, Kristin L ; Harris, Susan R ; Keast, David ; McNeely, Margaret L</creator><creatorcontrib>Dolgoy, Naomi D ; Al Onazi, Mona M ; Parkinson, Joanna F ; Gudmundsson, Haukur ; Radke, Lori L ; Dennett, Liz ; Campbell, Kristin L ; Harris, Susan R ; Keast, David ; McNeely, Margaret L</creatorcontrib><description>Background:
Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context.
Methods and Results:
We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy.
Conclusions:
No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1539-6851</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-8585</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1089/lrb.2022.0090</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37037029</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</publisher><ispartof>Lymphatic research and biology, 2023-10, Vol.21 (5), p.469-478</ispartof><rights>2023, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c293t-dffba1b5132a4306691162d18abc6159ddd26061555de69475254af1f03224143</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37037029$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dolgoy, Naomi D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al Onazi, Mona M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parkinson, Joanna F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gudmundsson, Haukur</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radke, Lori L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dennett, Liz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Kristin L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harris, Susan R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keast, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McNeely, Margaret L</creatorcontrib><title>The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema</title><title>Lymphatic research and biology</title><addtitle>Lymphat Res Biol</addtitle><description>Background:
Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context.
Methods and Results:
We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy.
Conclusions:
No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context.</description><issn>1539-6851</issn><issn>1557-8585</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMotlaPXiVHL1vzsdndHGvRKhSUUs8hu5mlkeyHye6h_94sVa_CwLwMD-_Ag9AtJUtKCvngfLlkhLElIZKcoTkVIk8KUYjzKXOZZIWgM3QVwieJGCXsEs14TuIwOUe7_QHwqu-9tkE73NV47Wxrq5jfva4GWwHejNZAvELAdefxowcdBrzWbQU-2YHTAxi8PTb9AQw0-hpd1NoFuPnZC_Tx_LRfvyTbt83rerVNKib5kJi6LjUtBeVMp5xkmaQ0Y4YWuqwyKqQxhmUkJiEMZDLNBROprmlNOGMpTfkC3Z96e999jRAG1dhQgXO6hW4MiuVSFvGVKCKanNDKdyF4qFXvbaP9UVGiJo0qalSTRjVpjPzdT_VYNmD-6F9vEeAnYDrrtnUWSvDDP7XfVPJ9XA</recordid><startdate>20231001</startdate><enddate>20231001</enddate><creator>Dolgoy, Naomi D</creator><creator>Al Onazi, Mona M</creator><creator>Parkinson, Joanna F</creator><creator>Gudmundsson, Haukur</creator><creator>Radke, Lori L</creator><creator>Dennett, Liz</creator><creator>Campbell, Kristin L</creator><creator>Harris, Susan R</creator><creator>Keast, David</creator><creator>McNeely, Margaret L</creator><general>Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20231001</creationdate><title>The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema</title><author>Dolgoy, Naomi D ; Al Onazi, Mona M ; Parkinson, Joanna F ; Gudmundsson, Haukur ; Radke, Lori L ; Dennett, Liz ; Campbell, Kristin L ; Harris, Susan R ; Keast, David ; McNeely, Margaret L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c293t-dffba1b5132a4306691162d18abc6159ddd26061555de69475254af1f03224143</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dolgoy, Naomi D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al Onazi, Mona M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parkinson, Joanna F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gudmundsson, Haukur</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radke, Lori L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dennett, Liz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Kristin L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harris, Susan R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keast, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McNeely, Margaret L</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Lymphatic research and biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dolgoy, Naomi D</au><au>Al Onazi, Mona M</au><au>Parkinson, Joanna F</au><au>Gudmundsson, Haukur</au><au>Radke, Lori L</au><au>Dennett, Liz</au><au>Campbell, Kristin L</au><au>Harris, Susan R</au><au>Keast, David</au><au>McNeely, Margaret L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema</atitle><jtitle>Lymphatic research and biology</jtitle><addtitle>Lymphat Res Biol</addtitle><date>2023-10-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>469</spage><epage>478</epage><pages>469-478</pages><issn>1539-6851</issn><eissn>1557-8585</eissn><abstract>Background:
Approaches to screening, assessment, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) vary widely. We evaluated overall quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for managing BCRL using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool, and relevance of consensus recommendations for the Canadian health context.
Methods and Results:
We searched electronic databases, gray literature, national lymphedema frameworks, and expert opinions, to identify lymphedema CPGs, printed/published from January 2013 to October 2021. Using AGREE II, six health care professionals reviewed CPGs for consensus. Domain-specific AGREE II quality consensus scores were required (≥70% for Rigor of Development; ≥ 60% for Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence; and ≥50% for Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, Scope, and Purpose). Results and overall recommendations from the CPGs were summarized and synthesized. Nine CPGs met inclusion criteria for review. Wide variability of evidence-based recommendations, and limited clinical considerations were found. Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation were adequate in six of nine CPGs; Stakeholder Involvement in seven of nine CPGs; and Editorial Independence in three of nine CPGs. Across all CPGs, Applicability was minimally reported. Only the Queensland Health CPG met quality consensus scores for Rigor and Development; however, the focus was limited to compression therapy.
Conclusions:
No CPG reviewed could be adopted for the Canadian health context. The proposed Canadian BCRL CPG will focus on stakeholder engagement, methodology, and implementation/evaluation. Using AGREE II allowed for assessment of quality of methods used to develop identified CPGs from other countries before consideration of adoption in a Canadian Context.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</pub><pmid>37037029</pmid><doi>10.1089/lrb.2022.0090</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1539-6851 |
ispartof | Lymphatic research and biology, 2023-10, Vol.21 (5), p.469-478 |
issn | 1539-6851 1557-8585 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2799829358 |
source | Alma/SFX Local Collection |
title | The Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T18%3A22%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Appraisal%20of%20Clinical%20Practice%20Guidelines%20for%20Breast%20Cancer-Related%20Lymphedema&rft.jtitle=Lymphatic%20research%20and%20biology&rft.au=Dolgoy,%20Naomi%20D&rft.date=2023-10-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=469&rft.epage=478&rft.pages=469-478&rft.issn=1539-6851&rft.eissn=1557-8585&rft_id=info:doi/10.1089/lrb.2022.0090&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2799829358%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2799829358&rft_id=info:pmid/37037029&rfr_iscdi=true |