The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13244-017-0563-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorised users.
Our aim was to evaluate the quality of published guidelines on musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSK-US) for adults.
Between June and July 2016, we conducted an online search for MSK-US guidelines, which were evaluated by four independent readers blinded to each other using the AGREE II tool. A fifth independent reviewer calculated scores per each domain and agreement between reviewers’ scores using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
Five guidelines were included in this appraisal. They were published between 2001 and 2014. Our appraisal showed intermediate results, with four out of five guidelines scoring “average” as overall quality. Domain 1 (scope and purpose) achieved the highest result (total score = 71.1% ± 18.7%). Domain 6 (editorial independence) had the lowest score (total score = 26.3% ± 19.3%). Interobserver agreement was very good for all the evaluated guidelines (ICC ranged between 0.932 and 0.956).
Overall, quality of MSK-US guidelines ranges from low to average when evaluated using the AGREE II tool. The editorial independence domain was the most critical, thus deserving more attention when developing future guidelines.
• Four of five guidelines on MSK-US had an average quality level.
• Scope/purpose had the highest score (71.1% ± 18.7%).
• Editorial independence had the lowest score (26.3% ± 19.3%).
• Interobserver agreement was very good (ranges: 0.932–0.956).
Lesniak BP, Loveland D, Jose J et al (2014) Use of ultrasonography as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in sports medicine. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg 30:260–270 CrossRef
Derchi L, Rizzato G (2007) Technical Requirements. In: Bianchi S, Martinoli C (eds) Ultrasound musculoskeletal system. Springer Verlag, Milano, pp 3–16 CrossRef
Zappia M, Aliprandi A, Pozza S et al (2016) How is shoulder ultrasound done in Italy? A survey of clinical practice. Skelet Radiol 45:1629–1634 CrossRef
Martinoli C (2010) Musculoskeletal ultrasound: technical guidelines. Insight Imaging 1:99–141 CrossRef
American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (2012) AIUM Practice Parameter for the Performance of a Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Examination. http://www.aium.org/resources/guidelines/musculoskeletal.pdf. Accessed 1 Apr 2017
ACR–AIUM–SPR–SRU (2014) Practice Parameter for the Performance of the Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Examination. https://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/PGTS/guidelines/US_Musculoskeletal.pdf
Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG (2001) Systematic reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context. BMJ Books
Grilli R, Magrini N, Penna A et al (2000) Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for a critical appraisal. Lancet (Lond, Engl) 355:103–106 CrossRef
EIBIR European Network for the Assessment of Imaging in Medicine. http://www.eibir.org/scientific-activities/joint-initiatives/euroaim/. Accessed 27 Dec 2016
Messina C, Bignotti B, Bazzocchi A et al (2017) A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: an EuroAIM initiative. Insights Imaging. doi: 10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6
- A critical appraisal of the quality of adult musculoskeletal ultrasound guidelines using the AGREE II tool: an EuroAIM initiative
Luca Maria Sconfienza
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie
Meistgelesene Bücher aus der Radiologie
Mail Icon II