Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are formally developed statements that assist users to provide proper health care for a kind of disease and play a significant contribution in healthcare system. This study report the methodological quality of CPGs on constipation.
Methods
The “Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation” (AGREEII) instrument was developed to determine the quality of CPGs. A comprehensive search was developed using five databases and three guideline websites until/up to December, 2015. Four independent authors evaluated the methodological issues of the CPGs by the AGREEII instrument.
Results
We identified 22 relevant guidelines on constipation from 1234 citations. The overall agreement among evaluators was 0.84 using the intra-class correlation coefficient. The mean AGREEII scores for the domains “scope and purpose” (51.77) and “rigor of development” (56.73) were moderate; afterward, three domains “stakeholder involvement” (32.23), “editorial independence” (29.59) and “applicability” (29.14) were low scores. The “clarity and presentation” (23.73) had the lowest scores.
Conclusion
Although existing constipation guidelines may accurately reflect current clinical practices, many guidelines’ methodological quality is low. Therefore, more emphasis and attentions should be taken to the development of high-quality guidelines.
Hinweise
Tian Hongliang and Ding Chao are joint first authors.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
THL, DC, GJF, LN, MCL: study concept, data extraction and wrote the manuscript; GLL, CQY, GXL, LVM: statistical analysis and critical revisions of the manuscript; LN, ZWM, LJS: study concept and design study supervision; All authors have approved the final manuscript.
Background
Constipation is a disorder defined by incomplete defecation, and/or infrequent bowel movements which associated with persistent difficult and/or painful defecation, fecal incontinence, and abdominal pain [1]. It is a common clinical functional diseases. The worldwide constipation surveys show a wide range of prevalence rates between 1 % and >20 % in western populations, although, a recent epidemiological reports found 16 % general adult populations were constipation [2]. Constipation may be found for up to 20 % of community-dwelling elderly individuals. Moreover the incidence of functional constipation in childhood estimated 3 % [3].
Because of its high disease burden, the treatment of constipation has become an important issue for clinicians and patients. During the last two decade there were more than 20 developed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to manage the constipation. The main role of the CPGs is to give clear recommendations to help clinicians make appropriate clinical decision for specific clinical circumstance [4, 5].
Anzeige
However, not all guidelines are developed with the same methodologically rigorous approaches, there is no research for evaluating the quality of CPGs on constipation so far. With the above in mind, the objectives of the present study was to systematically review guidelines using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREEII) instrument related to constipation [6].
Methods
Literature search
An electronic literature search using multiple databases (PubMed, EMBASE, The China Journal Full-text Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Scientific Journals Full-text Database), and guideline website or databases—including the Guidelines International Network (GIN) Database, the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) was conducted limited to Chinese and English from the inception to May 2015. MeSH terms and text words “guideline, consensus, recommendation, criteria, statement, constipation” for constipation and guidelines were used within the MEDLINE database. The same search strategy was made applicable for the other databases or websites.
Guideline selection and data extraction
Four reviewers (THL,DC,LN,GJF) independently extracted the guidelines which met the characteristics (for example, a clear guideline definition as proposed by the institute of Medicine [4], focused exclusively on constipation disease). We constructed a standard form table to extract the data of guidelines. Four reviewers extracted data separately, disagreements were discussed or by a fifth reviewer (GXL) if no consensus was reached.
Quality appraisal and recommendation
We evaluated the twenty-two included CPGs quality by AGREEII instrument [6]. The instrument includes a 23-item tool comprising six quality domains. The four authors read the entire AGREEII handbook and then independently rated all included guidelines using formula as follows:
According to the handbook for use of the AGREEII instrument, the six domain scores were considered independently. Finally, a guideline is labelled as “strongly recommended” if most domain scores are greater than 60 %. Guideline is “recommended” when most scores are between 30 % and 60 %. A guideline is labelled as “not recommended” when most domain scores are less than 30 % [7].
Statistical analysis
A descriptive study of item frequency was carried out and the AGREEII domain scores calculated as means. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) is a measure of the reliability of measurements or ratings within each domain [8]. Statistically significant was considered if p value less than 0.05.
Results and discussion
Literature search
Figure 1 shows how we screened the guidelines, we preliminary search found 1234 citations, 35 were excluded because they were duplicate citations. By screening their titles and abstracts and 1,146 citations were ineligible as they didn’t meet the characteristics of constipation CPGs, 31 articles were excluded from the left 53 studies as following: eight were duplicates, seven were not in English or Chinese, 14 were guidelines not related to constipation, and 2 guidelines were the old version. Finally, a total of 22 guidelines were included [9‐31].
Fig. 1
Flow of information through the different phases of the literature search
×
Guideline characteristics
The summary of CPGs baseline data were shown in Table 1. The twenty-two CPGs published between 2000 and 2014. Of the 22 selected CPGs, half of were from north America (America and Canada), six from European (UK, Ireland, Italy, Sweden) and the remaining five were from Asia (two from China, one from Korea, one from Indonesia and one multi-national),respectively. The scope of the CPRs varied: one guideline topic covered prevention, diagnosis and treatment of constipation [31]; two focused only on prevention and treatment [14, 16]; 16 covered diagnosis and treatment [9, 12, 13, 15, 17‐19, 21‐29]; three only focused on treatment [10, 20, 30] and one focused on prevention [11]. CPGs cited a range of number of references (range: 0–364, mean: 78) and were of varying length (mean number of pages = 25, range: 5–255). Each of the domains being evaluated using the AGREEII appraisal (Table 2). The ICCs score was moderate among raters (0.84; 95 % CI, 0.56–0.86).
Table 1
Characteristics of clinical practice guidelines for constipation
Title
Year
Country
Organization
Type of constipation
Topics covered
Update
No. of reference
Guideline page
Publication types
Systematic search
Evidence-based
Financial
American Gastroenterological Association Medical Position Statement: Guidelines on Constipation [9]
Management of chronic constipation: recommendations from a consensus panel [12]
2005
USA
None
Chronic constipation
Diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
55
8
Journal
Yes
Not reported
Yes,Pharmaceuticals Cor.
Evaluation and Treatment of Constipation in Infants and Children: Recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition [13]
2006
USA
NASPGHAN Constipation Guideline Committee
Infants and Children constipation
Diagnosis,treatment
Yes
96
13
Journal
Not reported
Yes
Not reported
Putting evidence into practice:evidence-based inventions for the prevention and management of constipation in patients with cancer [14]
2008
USA
ONS
constipation in patients with cancer
Prevention,treatment
Not reported
72
21
Journal
Not reported
Yes
Not reported
The management of constipation in palliative care: clinical practice recommendations [15]
2008
Ireland
The European Consensus Group on Constipation in Palliative Care
National Consensus on The Management of Constipation in Indonesia 2010 [17]
2010
Indonesia
ISG
Constipation
Diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
18
8
Journal
Not reported
No
Not reported
Constipation in Children and Young People: Diagnosis and Management of Idiopathic Childhood Constipation in Primary and Secondary Care [18]
2010
UK
NCC-WCH
Constipation in children and young people
Diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
140
255
Special website (NICE)
Yes
Yes
Not reported
Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Constipation in Patients with Advanced, Progressive Illness [19]
2010
Canada
The Canadian Consensus Development Group
Patients with Advanced, Progressive Illness
Diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
20
13
Journal
Not reported
Yes
Yes (edu cational grant from Wyeth)
Prucalopride for the treatment of chronic constipation in women [20]
2010
UK
NICE
Chronic constipation in women
Treatment
Not reported
11
38
Special website (Cancer Care Ontario Website)
Not reported
Yes
Not reported
Common views on diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation with Chinese medicine [21]
2011
China
CACM
Chronic constipation
Diagnosis,treatment
Yes
24
5
Journal
Not reported
No
Not reported
World Gastroenterology Organisation Global Guideline Constipation-A Global Perspective [22]
2011
Sweden
WGO
Adult patients
Diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
0
5
Journal
Not reported
Yes
None
Consensus statement AIGO/SICCR diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation [23, 24]
2012
Italy
AIGO/SICCR
Chronic constipation and obstructed defecation
Diagnosis Treatment
Not Reported
364
30
Journal
Not reported
Yes
Associazione Italiana Gastroenterologi and Endoscopisti Digestivi Ospedalieri
Practical Treatments for Constipation in Korea [25]
2012
Korea
KSNM
Constipation
Diagnosis,,treatment
Not reported
63
9
Journal
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Diagnosis and Treatment Guideline of Chronic Constipation in China [26]
2013
China
CMAG/CMAS
Chronic constipation
Diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
63
8
Journal
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Evaluation and Treatment of Functional Constipation in Infants and Children: Evidence-Based Recommendations From ESPGHAN and NASPGHAN [27]
2013
USA
ESPGHAN and NASPGHAN
Functional Constipation in Infants and Children
Diagnosis, treatment
Yes
111
17
Journal
Yes
Yes
NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN
Primary Care Management of Chronic Constipation in Asia: The ANMA Chronic Constipation Too l [28]
2013
Asia
ANMA
Chronic Constipation
Diagnosis,,treatment
Not reported
124
12
Journal
Not reported
No
educational grant was receive d from Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Boehringer Ingelheim
American Gastroenterological Association Medical Position Statement on Constipation [29]
2013
USA
AGA
Chronic Constipation
Diagnosis,treatment
Yes
1
7
Journal
Not reported
Yes
Not reported
Lubiprostone for treating chronic idiopathic constipation [30]
2014
UK
NICE
Chronic idiopathic constipation
Treatment
Not reported
0
9
Special website (NICE)
Yes
Yes
NICE
Emerging treatments in neurogastroenterology: a multidisciplinary working group consensus statement on opioid-induced constipation [31]
2014
USA
None
Opioid-induced constipation
Prevention,diagnosis,treatment
Not reported
61
10
Journal
Not reported
Not reported
AstraZeneca
Footnotes: NICE National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, ESMO European Society for Medical Oncology, ESDO European Society of Digestive Oncology, NCCN National Comprehensive Cancer Network, SEOM Spanish Society of Medical Oncology, GIN Guidelines International Network, NASPGHAN North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, AIGO Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists, SICCR Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery, NCC-WCH National Collaborating Centre for Women‘s and Children‘s Health, KSNM Constipation Study Group in the Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, NASPGHAN the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition, ESPGHAN: the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, ANMA the Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association, AGA American Gastroenterological Association, RNAOPA Registered Nurses Assocation of Ontario-Professional Association, ONS the Oncology Nursing Society, ISG The Indonesian Society of Gastroenterology, CACM China Association of Chinese Medicine, WGO World Gastroenterology Organization, CMAG/CMAS Chinese Medical Association of Gastroenterology Branch, Chinese Medical Association of Surgery Branch
Table 2
Guideline score according to score on each of the domains assessed by the AGREEII instrument
Title
Scope and Purpose
Stakeholder
Rigour
Clarity
Applicability
Editorial Independence
Recommendation
American Gastroenterological Association Medical Position Statement: Guidelines on Constipation [9]
31 %
11 %
7 %
44 %
15 %
0 %
Not recommended
Practice Guidelines for the Management of Constipation in adults [10]
44 %
22 %
36 %
44 %
25 %
0 %
Not recommended
Prevention of constipation in the older adult population [11]
81 %
39 %
58 %
72 %
54 %
54 %
Strongly recommended
Management of chronic constipation: recommendations from a consensus panel [12]
39 %
14 %
9 %
53 %
17 %
33 %
Not recommended
Evaluation and Treatment of Constipation in Infants and Children: Recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition [13]
56 %
31 %
46 %
58 %
31 %
0 %
Recommended
Putting evidence into practice:evidence-based inventions for the prevention and management of constipation in patients with cancer [14]
64 %
28 %
45 %
47 %
33 %
0 %
Recommended
The management of constipation in palliative care: clinical practice recommendations [15]
National Consensus on The Management of Constipation in Indonesia 2010 [17]
56 %
8 %
3 %
69 %
10 %
0 %
Not recommended
Constipation in Children and Young People: Diagnosis and Management of Idiopathic Childhood Constipation in Primary and Secondary Care [18]
78 %
61 %
50 %
75 %
54 %
71 %
Strongly recommended
Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Constipation in Patients with Advanced, Progressive Illness [19]
50 %
19 %
40 %
64 %
21 %
50 %
Recommended
Prucalopride for the treatment of chronic constipation in women [20]
56 %
39 %
33 %
72 %
58 %
50 %
Recommended
Common views on diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation with Chinese medicine [21]
17 %
8 %
11 %
56 %
23 %
0 %
Not recommended
World Gastroenterology Organisation Global Guideline Constipation-A Global Perspective [22]
36 %
14 %
14 %
47 %
21 %
83 %
Not recommended
Consensus statement AIGO/SICCR diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation [23, 24]
50 %
19 %
48 %
50 %
21 %
17 %
Not recommended
Practical Treatments for Constipation in Korea [25]
44 %
11 %
16 %
39 %
21 %
33 %
Not recommended
Diagnosis and Treatment Guideline of Chronic Constipation in China [26]
25 %
11 %
15 %
47 %
19 %
0 %
Not recommended
Evaluation and Treatment of Functional Constipation in Infants and Children: Evidence-Based Recommendations From ESPGHAN and NASPGHAN [27]
81 %
25 %
66 %
83 %
23 %
38 %
Recommended
Primary Care Management of Chronic Constipation in Asia: The ANMA Chronic Constipation Tool [28]
50 %
36 %
22 %
53 %
23 %
38 %
Recommended
American Gastroenterological Association Medical Position Statement on Constipation [29]
33 %
17 %
25 %
61 %
42 %
25 %
Not recommended
Lubiprostone for treating chronic idiopathic constipation [30]
75 %
39 %
46 %
44 %
38 %
67 %
Recommended
Emerging treatments in neurogastroenterology: a multidisciplinary working group consensus statement on opioid-induced constipation [31]
42 %
22 %
15 %
36 %
25 %
42 %
Not recommended
Total (\( \overline{X} \)±SD)
51.77 ± 18.24
23.73 ± 13.16
32.23 ± 19.24
56.73 ± 12.91
29.14 ± 13.55
29.59 ± 25.91
-
Appraisal of guidelines
Domain 1
Scope and purpose is concerned with the overall aim of the guideline, the specific health questions, and the target population (items 1–3) [32]. This domain’s mean score was 51.77 %, and nine of the guidelines (47.62 %) scored below 50 % [9, 10, 12, 21, 22, 25, 26, 29, 31].
Domain 2
Stakeholder involvement focuses on the extent to which the guideline was developed by the appropriate stakeholders and represents the views of its intended users (items 4–6) [32]. Of all AGREEII domains, this domain received the lowest scores (23.73 %) with only one CPG scoring over 50 %. Eighteen CPGs had been developed by a multi-disciplinary organization (81.82 %) [9, 11, 13‐30].
Domain 3
Rigor of development criteria relates to the process used to gather and synthesize the evidence, the methods to formulate the recommendations, and to update those (items 7–14) [32]. Overall, the mean score for this domain was only 32.23 % (range, 3 % to 66 %), with 18 CPGs scoring < 50 %. Meanwhile, only five CPGs reported systematic evidence searching [12, 16, 18, 27, 30], and Just 40.90 %(9/22) guidelines provided the methods for formulating the recommendations [11‐16, 26, 27, 29]. Moreover, an explicit link between the recommendations and the evidence were explicit in 20/22 of the guidelines and only five guidelines described a procedure about updating [11, 13, 21, 27, 29].
Domain 4
Clarity of presentation deals with the language, structure, and format of the guideline (items 15–17) [32]. The mean score for this domain was 56.73 % (range, 36 % to 83 %). Most CPGs provided a concrete and precise description of key recommendations with only eight guidelines scoring less than 50 % [9, 10, 14, 22, 25, 26, 30, 31].
Domain 5
Applicability pertains to the likely barriers and facilitators to implementation, strategies to improve uptake, and resource implications of applying the guideline (items 18–21) [32]. This domain’s score was 29.14 % (range, 10 % to 58 %) and only three CPGs scored > 50 % [11, 18, 20]. A total of 10 CPGs discussed barriers to implementing the guideline’s recommendations [11, 13, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 29‐31] and 7 guideline provides advice and/or tools on how the recommendations can be put into practice [11, 16, 18, 20, 29‐31]. Resource implications were not explicitly discussed, only five CPGs offered cost implications [11, 18, 20, 29, 30].
Domain 6
Editorial independence is concerned with the formulation of recommendations not being unduly biased with competing interests (items 22–23) [32]. The mean score for this domain was 29.59 %. Fifteen guidelines scored below 50 %. Most (63.64 %) guidelines did not provide the information whether they received funding or not [9‐11, 13, 14, 16‐18, 20‐22, 25, 26, 29].
Overall assessment
Guidelines were graded by the overall assessment. Only two CPGs can be strongly recommended [11, 18]. Eight can be recommended with provisions or alterations because of the most domains scoring between 30 % and 60 % [13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 27, 28, 30]. The remaining 12 CPGs were labelled as ‘not recommended’ due to the poor domain scores [9, 10, 12, 15, 17, 21‐26, 31] (Table 2).
Stratification of CPG quality
In order to examine which factors may have impacted quality scores in the six domains, we stratified the data on the following variables (guideline area, AGREEII publication date, publication type, working group, comprehensive search or not, fund support or not, and evidence-based or not) in Table 3. We didn’t find the difference in six domains quality related to publication year of AGREEII (before or after 2010). Meanwhile, guidelines published in guideline databases were significantly have a higher scores than that in journals. The scores from CPGs developed by medical societies were higher when compared with individuals for the following items: Scope &Purpose, Stakeholders, Rigour, and Applicability. If CPGs were evidence-based, those three domains (Rigour, Applicability and Editorial independence) would have a higher scores. Apart from above, we found no differences in the rest of the comparisons.
Table 3
Mean (±SD) AGREEII scores by subgroups
Subgroups
Scope & Purpose
Stakeholders
Rigour
Clarity
Applicability
Editorial Independence
Year of publication
≤ 2010 (n = 12)
57.17 ± 15.41
26.67 ± 14.93
35.92 ± 19.77
61.00 ± 11.4
32.08 ± 16.62
25.67 ± 25.98
> 2010 (n = 10)
45.30 ± 20.18
20.20 ± 10.53
27.80 ± 18.80
51.60 ± 13.34
25.67 ± 25.98
34.30 ± 26.39
P values
0.146
0.249
0.337
0.096
0.247
0.451
Publication Type
Journal (n = 16)
44.72 ± 15.14
18.33 ± 7.88
25.72 ± 17.65
53.94 ± 12.35
24.17 ± 8.30
24.83 ± 22.83
Database (n = 6)
68.17 + 14.74
38.5 + 12.93
47.67 + 11.84
62.33 + 14.43
45.5 + 12.49
45.17 + 26.63
P values
0.003
0.01
0.004
0.239
0.007
0.134
Type of development group
Individual (n = 4)
50.00 ± 16.79
22.25 ± 6.95
30.75 ± 24.42
50.00 ± 13.29
27.75 ± 11.47
26.00 ± 18.17
Medical society (n = 18)
52.17 ± 19.07
24.06 ± 14.39
32.59 ± 18.85
58.22 ± 12.74
29.44 ± 14.17
30.39 ± 27.70
P values
0.829
0.718
0.896
0.318
0.808
0.707
Systematic search
No (n = 14)
47.57 ± 16.55
19.79 ± 10.70
29.50 ± 17.86
55.43 ± 11.51
26.79 ± 113.64
22.00 ± 27.5
Yes (n = 8)
59.13 + 20.01
30.63 + 15.07
37.00 + 22.5
59.00 + 15.70
33.25 + 13.02
42.88 + 17.03
P values
0.190
0.1
0.428
0.585
0.288
0.04
Financial
No (n = 14)
46.08 ± 15.97
19.23 ± 9.74
25.31 ± 18.73
52.31 ± 10.78
23.77 ± 8.63
15.08 ± 17.59
Yes (n = 8)
60.00 ± 19.21
30.22 ± 15.39
42.22 ± 16.22
63.11 ± 13.68
36.89 ± 15.85
50.56 ± 21.48
P values
0.46
0.97
0.51
0.91
0.10
0.18
Evidence-based
No (n = 13)
46.08 ± 15.97
19.23 ± 9.74
25.31 ± 18.73
52.31 ± 10.78
23.77 ± 8.63
15.08 ± 17.59
Yes (n = 9)
60.00 ± 19.20
30.22 ± 15.39
42.22 ± 16.22
63.11 ± 13.68
36.89 ± 15.85
50.56 ± 21.48
P values
0.09
0.08
0.04
0.07
0.04
0.00
Discussion
We conducted a comprehensive assessment of the quality of CPGs for constipation. In general, these guidelines existed many deficits. Most of the guidelines had a low score in the following (domain 2, domain 3, domain 5 and domain 6). Table 4 showed that the scores results when compared with international CPGs level [33].
Table 4
A comparison of domain scores between these 22 CPGs and international level (%)
Domain
Scope and purpose
Stakeholder involvement
Rigor of development
Clarity of presentation
Applicability
Editorial independence
Constipation mean scores
52
24
32
57
29
30
International mean scores
64
35
43
60
22
30
According to the results, the mean score of domain 3 received only 32.23 %. Methods of the search and the criteria for choose evidence must be clearly described. Meanwhile, the contents of health benefits and risks, externally reviewed by experts should be provided. In order to improve the score of domain 3, particular attention should be paid in above shortcomings.
Anzeige
There were only 2 CPGs included guideline developing experts in the panel [11, 18]. What’s more, no patients was invited to participate in the development term. The domain 5 “applicability” have an important role in the CPGs promotion, it should provide advice and/or tools on how the recommendations can be put into practice. These low scores reflect that CPG producers remain have much work to be done to improve guideline applicability.
Lastly, the scores in the domain 6 were less than 30 %. Many guidelines are developed with external funding, the name of the funding body and a statement that the funding body did not influence the content of the guideline should be explicit consideration [34]. What’s more, there should be a clearly declaration that competing interests of guideline development group members have been recorded and addressed. Therefore, conflict of interests need to be clearly stated.
There are two guidelines which we want to recommend strongly due to their high overall quality developed by Registered Nurses Association of Ontario-Professional Association (RNAOPA) [11] and an Italian guideline by the National Collaborating Centre for Women‘s and Children‘s Health (NCC-WCH) [18]. The detailed recommendations were listed in Table 5. Eight of twenty-two guidelines can be reported with provisos and alterations [13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 27, 28, 30], while the remaining 12 CPGs could not be recommended because most domain scores below 30 % [9, 10, 12, 15, 17, 21‐26, 29‐31].
Table 5
The detail recommendations information of 2 highly guidelines
Title
Items
Recommendations
Prevention of constipation in the older adult population [11]
Practice Recommendations
Assess client history (dietary fibre, medications), Physical activity, Evaluate client response for ongoing interventions
Education Recommendation
Comprehensive education programs
Organization & Policy Recommendations
Establish an interdisciplinary team
Constipation in Children and Young People: Diagnosis and Management of Idiopathic Childhood Constipation in Primary and Secondary Care [18]
History-taking
Stool patterns, Symptoms associated with defecation, History, Timing of onset of constipation and potential precipitating factors, Passage of meconium, Growth and general wellbeing, Symptoms in legs/locomotor development, Abdomen, Diet and fluid intake
Physical examination
Inspection of perianal area: appearance, position, patency, etc.; Abdominal examination; Spine/lumbosacral region/gluteal examination; Lower limb neuromuscular examination including tone and strength, reflexes
Endoscopy, Test for coeliac disease and hypothyroidism, Test for coeliac disease and hypothyroidism, plain abdominal radiograph, Transit studies, Rectal biopsy, Ultrasound; biofeedback; Antegrade colonic enema procedure
However, our evaluation has several limitations. First, AGREEII rarely suggest how guidelines should select topics. To be useful, guidelines should address the challenges that clinicians face in practice, but developers may exclude clinically important topics when available evidence does not meet minimum standards. Second, inclusion criteria have a language restriction (English and Chinese), language search bias might happen. Third, we used only the AGREEII instrument evaluated the CPGs other than instruments may bring some selection bias [35]. AGREEII instrument have been introduced from 2010, frankly speaking, guidelines published before 2010 did not have access to AGREEII to comply with it. Unfortunately, there is no difference when we compare the six domains quality before and after 2010. We can find even if methodological requirements for CPGs are reported comply with these remains unsatisfactory. What’s more, how to spread the CPGs preferable is essential for clinical practice [36]. Through above specific methodological quality analysis, which can effectively promote the development of future constipation CPGs.
Anzeige
Conclusions
The results find that the quality of CPGs for constipation is poor. Guideline quality may be improved if we comply with the AGREEII instrument.
Acknowledgment
This work was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (81270006) and 12th Five-Year Major Program of Army Research (AWS12J001). We would like to thank Nadeem Anjum from Nanjing University for the language modifications.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
THL, DC, GJF, LN, MCL: study concept, data extraction and wrote the manuscript; GLL, CQY, GXL, LVM: statistical analysis and critical revisions of the manuscript; LN, ZWM, LJS: study concept and design study supervision; All authors have approved the final manuscript.
Die Therapie von Echinokokkosen sollte immer in spezialisierten Zentren erfolgen. Eine symptomlose Echinokokkose kann – egal ob von Hunde- oder Fuchsbandwurm ausgelöst – konservativ erfolgen. Wenn eine Op. nötig ist, kann es sinnvoll sein, vorher Zysten zu leeren und zu desinfizieren.
Bewegungs-, Dehnungs- und Entspannungsübungen im Wasser lindern die Beschwerden von Patientinnen mit Fibromyalgie besser als das Üben auf trockenem Land. Das geht aus einer spanisch-brasilianischen Vergleichsstudie hervor.
Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.
Ob die Katheterablation von Vorhofflimmern bei Patienten mit Herzinsuffizienz die Komplikationsraten senkt, scheint davon abzuhängen, ob die Auswurfleistung erhalten ist oder nicht. Das legen die Ergebnisse einer Metaanalyse nahe.
Update Innere Medizin
Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.
