Agreement between Cochrane Neonatal reviews and clinical practice guidelines for newborns in Denmark: a cross-sectional study

Tonsillar-related pathologies: An analysis of the evidence underpinning management recommendations

OBJECTIVE

Evidence-based decision making is crucial in reducing the health and economic burdens imposed by tonsillar-related pathologies. Clinical practice guidelines are used to guide these decisions; however, uptake of recommendations in these guidelines is low. Systematic reviews are the highest level of evidence used to influence guideline recommendations; therefore, improving the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews related to tonsillar-related pathologies may improve guideline uptake and patient care.

METHODS

We used PubMed to search for all clinical practice guidelines related to tonsillar-related pathologies from 2010 to 2020. Included guidelines were then searched for all systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Study characteristics were extracted from each cited systematic review/meta-analysis before being evaluated using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Instrument for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2) instruments. We then compared systematic reviews conducted by a Cochrane systematic review group with non-Cochrane systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Seven clinical practice guidelines were included in our study and within these guidelines 98 SRs/MAs were cited, 80 of which were unique and included. Systematic reviews composed 9.1% (98/1082) of all guideline citations. Guideline PRISMA scores ranged from 0.47 to 0.83 with a mean score of 0.71 (n = 80) and guideline AMSTAR-2 scores ranged from 0.52 to 0.83 with a mean of 0.56 (7.29/13) and 0.75 (11.94/16) (n = 80). Cochrane systematic reviews displayed greater PRISMA (0.88 vs. 0.64: p < 0.001) and AMSTAR-2 (0.90 vs. 0.57; p < 0.001) scores compared to the non-Cochrane studies. We found PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 scores were positively correlated across guidelines (r = 0.93).

CONCLUSION

Wide variation exists in adherence to PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 guidelines among systematic reviews cited in clinical practice guidelines for tonsillar-related pathologies. Prior registration and adequate risk of bias assessment are two areas where improvements may be needed. Given the importance of guideline uptake, careful considerations to improve the methodological and reporting quality of evidence supporting tonsillar-related pathology recommendations are necessary.

Treating schizophrenia: the quality of evidence behind treatment recommendations and how it can improve

OBJECTIVE

To assess the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews that comprise the American Psychiatric Association (APA) Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Patients with Schizophrenia and to determine the extent to which results from Cochrane systematic reviews published after guideline development would alter or confirm current recommendations.

PARTICIPANTS

Systematic reviews that underpinned recommendations in the APA guidelines and Cochrane systematic reviews.

MAIN OUTCOME

Three independent reviewers scored all systematic reviews referenced in the guideline for quality and reporting using AMSTAR and PRISMA checklist, respectively. Items in both tools were individually graded and compared to identify consistently low-performing areas within the systematic reviews. Post hoc analysis of the Cochrane systematic reviews since the latest revision of APA's guidelines were performed to determine whether their findings were congruent with recent recommendations.

RESULTS

The mean score of the 57 reviews on the PRISMA checklist was 70%. The mean AMSTAR score was 6.8, correlating with a moderate quality score. Post hoc analysis revealed that 171 Cochrane reviews had been published since the APA guideline release. Only half of the reviews of pharmacological interventions confirmed current recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The methodological quality of the systematic reviews included in the APA guideline was deficient in key areas. Our study brings to light the importance of using high-quality evidence in the development of clinical practice guidelines. An updated APA guideline (last updated in 2009) is necessary to provide the highest quality treatment recommendations for clinicians in the management of schizophrenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN-CTR, UMIN000023099.

Specialist health care services use in a European cohort of infants born very preterm

AIM

Children born very preterm require additional specialist care because of the health and developmental risks associated with preterm birth, but information on their health service use is sparse. We sought to describe the use of specialist services by children born very preterm in Europe.

METHOD

We analysed data from the multi-regional, population-based Effective Perinatal Intensive Care in Europe (EPICE) cohort of births before 32 weeks' gestation in 11 European countries. Perinatal data were abstracted from medical records and parents completed a questionnaire at 2 years corrected age (4322 children; 2026 females, 2296 males; median gestational age 29wks, interquartile range [IQR] 27-31wks; median birthweight 1230g, IQR 970-1511g). We compared parent-reported use of specialist services by country, perinatal risk (based on gestational age, small for gestational age, and neonatal morbidities), maternal education, and birthplace.

RESULTS

Seventy-six per cent of the children had consulted at least one specialist, ranging across countries from 53.7% to 100%. Ophthalmologists (53.4%) and physiotherapists (48.0%) were most frequently consulted, but individual specialists varied greatly by country. Perinatal risk was associated with specialist use, but the gradient differed across countries. Children with more educated mothers had higher proportions of specialist use in three countries.

INTERPRETATION

Large variations in the use of specialist services across Europe were not explained by perinatal risk and raise questions about the strengths and limits of existing models of care.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

Use of specialist services by children born very preterm varied across Europe. This variation was observed for types and number of specialists consulted. Perinatal risk was associated with specialist care, but did not explain country-level differences. In some countries, mothers' educational level affected use of specialist services.

Do guidelines for treating chest disease in children use Cochrane Reviews effectively? A systematic review

Cochrane Reviews summarise best evidence and should inform guidelines. We assessed the use of Cochrane Reviews in the UK guidelines for paediatric respiratory disease. We found 21 guidelines which made 1025 recommendations, of which 96 could be informed by a Cochrane Review. In 38/96 recommendations (40%), some or all of the relevant Cochrane Reviews were not cited. We linked recommendations to 140 Cochrane Reviews. In 37/140 (26%) cases, the guideline recommendation did not fully agree with the Cochrane Review. Guideline developers may fail to use Cochrane Reviews or may make recommendations which are not in line with best evidence.

Methodological quality, completeness of reporting and use of systematic reviews as evidence in clinical practice guidelines for paediatric overweight and obesity

Paediatric obesity rates remain high despite extensive efforts to prevent and treat obesity in children. We investigated the quality of the methodology and reporting within systematic reviews (SRs) underpinning paediatric content in US clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). In June 2016 we searched guideline clearinghouses and professional organization websites for guidelines published by national or professional organizations in the United States from January 2007 onwards. In our primary, a priori analysis, we used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) instruments to score SRs and meta-analyses that included paediatric populations and were cited by included CPGs. In a secondary, post hoc analysis, we determined the extent to which US CPGs use available, relevant SRs and meta-analyses compared with non-US CPGs. Eight US-based CPGs with 27 references to 22 unique SRs were found. AMSTAR and PRISMA scores were low overall, with only three SRs having 'high' methodological quality. Items dealing with bias assessments and search strategies had especially low scores. US CPGs were also older on average and cited fewer SRs than their international counterparts. Low quality scores and dated guidelines should be a cause for concern among practicing clinicians and a call to action for future guideline developers, publishers and research institutions.

Use of evidence based practices to improve survival without severe morbidity for very preterm infants: results from the EPICE population based cohort

OBJECTIVES

 To evaluate the implementation of four high evidence practices for the care of very preterm infants to assess their use and impact in routine clinical practice and whether they constitute a driver for reducing mortality and neonatal morbidity.

DESIGN

 Prospective multinational population based observational study.

SETTING

 19 regions from 11 European countries covering 850 000 annual births participating in the EPICE (Effective Perinatal Intensive Care in Europe for very preterm births) project.

PARTICIPANTS

 7336 infants born between 24+0 and 31+6 weeks' gestation in 2011/12 without serious congenital anomalies and surviving to neonatal admission.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

 Combined use of four evidence based practices for infants born before 28 weeks' gestation using an "all or none" approach: delivery in a maternity unit with appropriate level of neonatal care; administration of antenatal corticosteroids; prevention of hypothermia (temperature on admission to neonatal unit ≥36°C); surfactant used within two hours of birth or early nasal continuous positive airway pressure. Infant outcomes were in-hospital mortality, severe neonatal morbidity at discharge, and a composite measure of death or severe morbidity, or both. We modelled associations using risk ratios, with propensity score weighting to account for potential confounding bias. Analyses were adjusted for clustering within delivery hospital.

RESULTS

 Only 58.3% (n=4275) of infants received all evidence based practices for which they were eligible. Infants with low gestational age, growth restriction, low Apgar scores, and who were born on the day of maternal admission to hospital were less likely to receive evidence based care. After adjustment, evidence based care was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (risk ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.87) and in-hospital mortality or severe morbidity, or both (0.82, 0.73 to 0.92), corresponding to an estimated 18% decrease in all deaths without an increase in severe morbidity if these interventions had been provided to all infants.

CONCLUSIONS

 More comprehensive use of evidence based practices in perinatal medicine could result in considerable gains for very preterm infants, in terms of increased survival without severe morbidity.

Neonatal Risk Factors for Treatment-Demanding Retinopathy of Prematurity: A Danish National Study

PURPOSE

One goal of the study was to identify "new" statistically independent risk factors for treatment-demanding retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Another goal was to evaluate whether any new risk factors could explain the increase in the incidence of treatment-demanding ROP over time in Denmark.

DESIGN

A retrospective, register-based cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included premature infants (n = 6490) born in Denmark from 1997 to 2008.

METHODS

The study sample and the 31 candidate risk factors were identified in 3 national registers. Data were linked through a unique civil registration number. Each of the 31 candidate risk factors were evaluated in univariate analyses, while adjusted for known risk factors (i.e., gestational age [GA] at delivery, small for gestational age [SGA], multiple births, and male sex). Significant outcomes were analyzed thereafter in a backward selection multiple logistic regression model.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Treatment-demanding ROP and its associations to candidate risk factors.

RESULTS

Mechanical ventilation (odds ratio [OR], 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99-4.08; P < 0.01) and blood transfusion (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.20-3.14; P = 0.01) were the only new statistically independent risk factors, in addition to GA at delivery, SGA, multiple births, and male sex. Modification in these prognostic factors for ROP did not cause an increase in treatment-demanding ROP.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large study population, blood transfusion and mechanical ventilation were the only new statistically independent risk factors to predict the development of treatment-demanding ROP. Modification in the neonatal treatment with mechanical ventilation or blood transfusion did not cause the observed increase in the incidence of preterm infants with treatment-demanding ROP during a recent birth period (2003-2008).