A systematic review and quality appraisal of bereavement care practice guidelines

Kent, Katherine; Jessup, Belinda; Marsh, Pauline; Barnett, Tony; Ball, MJ

doi:10.1111/jep.13225

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This might due to the insufficient collection of patients' views and preferences during guideline development. Similar suboptimal reporting on stakeholder involvement was documented from previous literatures (29)(30)(31). Although for physicians and surgeons, such information may have little role on the reliability of recommendation, the adoption of patients' opinions may be helpful to improve the informed decision for guideline development.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

The Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensuses on the Management of Primary Aldosteronism: A Critical Appraisal

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several guidelines and expert consensuses have been developed for management of primary aldosteronism (PA). It is important to understand the detailed recommendations and quality of these guidelines to help physicians make informed and reliable decision. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and three websites were searched for practice guidelines or consensuses of PA from inception to January 24, 2019. We summarized the major recommendations on the management of PA from these guidelines and consensuses. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II was used to assess quality of the included guidelines and consensuses. Results: We identified three clinical practice guidelines and three consensus statements. Most of the recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of PA from these guidelines and consensuses were consistent. Some minor conflicts were recorded for patient's screen and confirmation test. All included guideline documents have a good quality (score, >70%) on the scope and purpose (mean score, 81.02%) and clarity of presentation of the recommendations (mean score, 86.88%). However, the reporting for the stakeholder involvement (mean score, 54.32%) and applicability (mean score, 47.92%) were insufficient. There was an insufficient rigorousness in most of the guideline documents (mean score, 45.56%) on the development process. The Endocrine Society practice guideline 2016 ranked highest in quality (score, 81.13%). Conclusions: Existing guideline documents provided valuable recommendations on the management of PA, but further efforts are needed to improve the methodological quality. The Endocrine Society practice guideline 2016 was recommended for use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

The Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensuses on the Management of Primary Aldosteronism: A Critical Appraisal

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If unavailable, standards of care remain unclear, with health professionals lacking guidance on how to provide family care. Hence, there is a clear need to develop clinical practice guidelines for family engagement and support during the dying phase and the bereavement phase that are of high quality and implementable across settings (Kent et al, 2020;Sarkies et al, 2022;Spoon et al, 2020).…”

Section: Adoption Of and Barriers To Evidence-based Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption of evidence‐based end‐of‐life and bereavement support to families in cancer care: A contextual analysis study with health professionals

Riguzzi,

Thaqi,

Peng‐Keller

et al. 2024

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimsTo investigate the level of adoption of evidence‐based family engagement and support during end‐of‐life cancer care and subsequent bereavement and its contextual facilitators and barriers from health professionals' perspectives, and to explore differences between professional groups.DesignContextual analysis using an online cross‐sectional survey.MethodsThis study was conducted in four Swiss hospitals and three home care oncology and palliative care services. Non‐parametric testing was used to investigate the level of adoption and differences between nurses, physicians, occupational‐ and physiotherapists and psychosocial professionals (chaplains, onco‐psychologists and social workers). The STROBE checklist for cross‐sectional studies was followed.ResultsThe majority of the 111 participating health professionals were nurses. Adoption was statistically significantly higher during end‐of‐life care than bereavement, with nurses and physicians reporting higher levels than the other professional groups. Guidance on end‐of‐life family care was available in about half of the cases, in contrast to a quarter for bereavement care. Self‐perceived knowledge, skills and attitudes were moderate to high, with nurses and physicians reporting higher levels than others, except for general skills in working with families. Organisational structures were experienced as rather supportive, with the psychosocial group appraising the organisational context as significantly less conducive to fully implementing end‐of‐life and bereavement care than others, particularly during the end‐of‐life phase.ConclusionEvidence‐based family engagement and support were better adopted during end‐of‐life care than bereavement. Overall, nurses and physicians felt better enabled to care for families compared to other professional groups.Patient or Public ContributionNo patient or public contribution.Protocol registrationhttps://osf.io/j4kfh.Implications for the profession and/or patient careImplementation and quality improvement efforts should focus particularly on the bereavement phase and be tailored to professional groups.ImpactThe findings show that evidence‐based family engagement and support practices during end‐of‐life were rather well adopted in contrast to subsequent bereavement care, with nurses and physicians better enabled than other professionals to provide care. A better understanding of health professionals' contributions and roles in family care is important to build interprofessional capacity for evidence‐based end‐of‐life and bereavement support.Reporting MethodThe STROBE checklist for reports of cross‐sectional studies was followed (von Elm et al., 2007).

show abstract

“…In fact, Molino et al showed that higher quality CPGs had reported funding sources 10 times more often than those of lower quality 24 . Multiple recent studies rea rmed the low scores across guidelines for this domain [59][60][61] ; and this gap is crucial in LMICs especially 62 , however, it can be argued that it is equally important for countries world-wide.…”

Section: Agree Tool Use and Domainsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing guideline quality through country-wide and regional appraisal of CPGs: a scoping review

Allister

Flórez

Stoker

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are evaluated for quality with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) tool(s), and this is increasingly done for different countries and regional groupings. This study aimed to describe, map, and compare these geographical synthesis studies, that assessed CPG quality using the AGREE tool(s). This allowed for a global interpretation of the current landscape of these country-wide or regional quality reviews, and a closer look at their methodology and results. Study design and Methods: A scoping review was conducted searching databases Medline, Embase, Epistemonikos, and grey literature on 5 October 2021 for review studies using the latest AGREE tool(s) to evaluate country-wide or regional CPG quality. Country-wide or regional reviews were the units of analysis, and simple descriptive statistics was used to conduct the analysis. AGREE scores were analysed across subgroups into one of the seven SDG regions, to allow for meaningful interpretation. Results Fifty-seven studies fulfilled our eligibility criteria, including 2918 CPGs. Regions of the Global North, and Eastern and South-East Asia were best represented. Studies were consistent in reporting and presenting their AGREE domain and overall results, but only 18% (n = 10) reported development methods and 19% (n = 11) reported use of GRADE. Overall scores for domains Rigor of development and Editorial independence were low, notably in middle-income countries. There were no reviews from low-income countries. Editorial Independence, especially, were low across all regions with a maximum domain score of 46%. Conclusion There is an increasing tendency to appraise country-wide and regional CPGs using quality appraisal tools, and this will expectantly improve quality of CPGs globally. The AGREE tool(s), evaluated in this study, were used well and consistently across studies. Findings of low report rates of development of CPGs and of use of GRADE is concerning, as is low domain scores globally for Editorial Independence. Transparent reporting of funding and competing interests, as well as highlighting evidence-to-decision processes, should assist in further improving quality as Clinicians (especially those from lower income regions) are in dire need of high-quality guidelines.

show abstract

A systematic review and quality appraisal of bereavement care practice guidelines

Cited by 10 publications

References 29 publications

The Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensuses on the Management of Primary Aldosteronism: A Critical Appraisal

The Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensuses on the Management of Primary Aldosteronism: A Critical Appraisal

Adoption of evidence‐based end‐of‐life and bereavement support to families in cancer care: A contextual analysis study with health professionals

Advancing guideline quality through country-wide and regional appraisal of CPGs: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About