AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care

Jump to comment:
- Posted on: (18 July 2019)Page navigation anchor for Is it now time to move to AGREE-III?Is it now time to move to AGREE-III?
- Joseph Watine, Consultant, Laboratory Medicine, Hôpital de Villefranche-de-Rouergue, France
As recently pointed out by Djulbegovic, Bennett, and Guyatt [1, 2], if we are to improve delivery of health care, there must be an awareness that QI initiatives that fail to rigorously process underlying evidence and adapt this evidence to the local environment may prove wasteful and even harmful. Maybe, almost ten years after AGREE-II has been launched, this wise statement begins to be applicale to the AGREE-II initiative [3] ?
AGREE-II focuses on quality of guideline development, whereas it has been shown that methodologic quality is not sufficient to ensure that recommendations are appropriate/accurate [4-12]. Maybe it is a good starting point for health care professional to evaluate guideline quality, but then they should also evaluate guideline content before they decide to implement any recommandation in daily practice.
Among the hundreds of guidelines methodologic evaluations with the help of the AGREE instrument, that have been published so far [some of which have been reviewed in references 13-15], only a small minority also evaluated guidelines content. Maybe we could not affirm for sure that AGREE has been harmful, but if AGREE-II were not able to improve in the near future, then it might well end up becoming wasteful.
Maybe it is time now to think about AGREE-III, where Djulbegovic, Bennett, and Guyatt's proposal would be taken into account ?
References:
Show More
[1] Djulbegovic B, Bennett CL, Guyatt G. Failure to place evidence a...As recently pointed out by Djulbegovic, Bennett, and Guyatt [1, 2], if we are to improve delivery of health care, there must be an awareness that QI initiatives that fail to rigorously process underlying evidence and adapt this evidence to the local environment may prove wasteful and even harmful. Maybe, almost ten years after AGREE-II has been launched, this wise statement begins to be applicale to the AGREE-II initiative [3] ?
AGREE-II focuses on quality of guideline development, whereas it has been shown that methodologic quality is not sufficient to ensure that recommendations are appropriate/accurate [4-12]. Maybe it is a good starting point for health care professional to evaluate guideline quality, but then they should also evaluate guideline content before they decide to implement any recommandation in daily practice.
Among the hundreds of guidelines methodologic evaluations with the help of the AGREE instrument, that have been published so far [some of which have been reviewed in references 13-15], only a small minority also evaluated guidelines content. Maybe we could not affirm for sure that AGREE has been harmful, but if AGREE-II were not able to improve in the near future, then it might well end up becoming wasteful.
Maybe it is time now to think about AGREE-III, where Djulbegovic, Bennett, and Guyatt's proposal would be taken into account ?
References:
Show Less
[1] Djulbegovic B, Bennett CL, Guyatt G. Failure to place evidence at the centre of quality improvement remains a major barrier for advances in quality improvement. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019 Jun;25(3):369-372. Doi: 10.1111/jep.13146.
[2] Djulbegovic B, Bennett CL, Guyatt G. A unifying framework for improving health care. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019 Jun;25(3):358-362. doi: 10.1111/jep.13066.
[3] Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, Fervers B, Graham ID, Grimshaw J, Hanna SE, Littlejohns P, Makarski J, Zitzelsberger L; AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010 Dec 14;182(18):E839-42. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.090449. http://www.cmaj.ca/content/182/18/E839
[4] Burgers JS. Guideline quality and guideline content: are they related? Clin Chem. 2006 Jan;52(1):3-4.
[5] Watine J, Friedberg B, Nagy E, Onody R, Oosterhuis W, Bunting PS, Charet JC, Horvath AR. Conflict between guideline methodologic quality and recommendation validity: a potential problem for practitioners. Clin Chem. 2006 Jan;52(1):65-72.
[6] Watine JC, Bunting PS. Mass colorectal cancer screening: methodological quality of practice guidelines is not related to their content validity. Clin Biochem. 2008 May;41(7-8):459-66. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2007.12.020.
[7] Matthys J, De Meyere M. Quality evidence important for quality guidelines. CMAJ. 2010 Sep 21;182(13):1449-50. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110-2105.
[8] Matthys J, De Meyere M, van Driel ML, et al. Differences among international pharyngitis guidelines : not just academic. Ann Fam Med. 2007;5:436–43.
[9] Nuckols TK, Lim YW, Wynn BO, Mattke S, MacLean CH, Harber P, Brook RH, Wallace P, Garland RH, Asch S. Rigorous development does not ensure that guidelines are acceptable to a panel of knowledgeable providers. J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Jan;23(1):37-44.
[10] Eikermann M, Holzmann N, Siering U, Rüther A. Tools for assessing the content of guidelines are needed to enable their effective use--a systematic comparison. BMC Res Notes. 2014 Nov 26;7:853. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-853.
[11] Coates D, Homer C, Wilson A, Deady L, Mason E, Foureur M, Henry A. Induction of labour indications and timing: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines. Women Birth. 2019 Jul 5. pii: S1871-5192(19)30141-6. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2019.06.004.
[12] Pallari E, Fox AW, Lewison G. Differential research impact in cancer practice guidelines' evidence base: lessons from ESMO, NICE and SIGN. ESMO Open. 2018 Jan 6;3(1):e000258. doi: 10.1136/esmoopen-2017-000258.
[13] Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Solà I, Gich I, Delgado-Noguera M, Rigau D, Tort S, Bonfill X, Burgers J, Schunemann H. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010 Dec;19(6):e58. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2010.042077.
[14] Armstrong JJ, Goldfarb AM, Instrum RS, MacDermid JC. Improvement evident but still necessary in clinical practice guideline quality: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;81:13-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.08.005.
[15] Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC. Do guidelines offer implementation advice to target users? A systematic review of guideline applicability. BMJ Open. 2015 Feb 18;5(2):e007047. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007047.Competing Interests: None declared.
In this issue
Article tools
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of iron deficiency anaemia in adults
- Quality assessment and comparative analysis on the recommendations of current guidelines on the management of peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review protocol
- Telehealth in Rheumatology: The 2021 Arab League of Rheumatology Best Practice Guidelines
- Improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments: a protocol for Development of a consultation intervention (iFraP-D)
- Awareness and Agreement with Neurofibromatosis Care Guidelines among Neurofibromatosis Specialists
- Airway recommendations for perioperative patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review
- Which ethical values underpin Englands National Health Service reset of paediatric and maternity services following COVID-19: a rapid review
- Public Health and Health Systems Impacts of SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern: A Rapid Scoping Review
- Physical activity promotion is lacking in local treatment protocols for patients hospitalized with myocardial infarction: A cross-sectional study
- Methodological quality of recommendations on vitamin D and calcium - a systematic review of bone health guidelines
- International clinical practice guidelines for gender minority/trans people: systematic review and quality assessment
- Systematic Review: Recommendations for Rehabilitation in ASD and ID from Clinical Practice Guidelines
- Clinical practice guidelines for the management of atraumatic shoulder conditions: protocol for a systematic review
- Patients participation in government-sponsored guidelines in Latin America: a cross-sectional study
- Gestion des conflits dinterets durant lelaboration de lignes directrices en sante
- Systematic review of global clinical practice guidelines for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia
- Managing conflicts of interest in the development of health guidelines
- Clinical practice guidelines and recommendations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: systematic review and critical appraisal
- Recommendations for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 testing: a scoping review of current guidance
- Sex and gender considerations in low back pain clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review
- Systematic review of clinical guidelines for lipid lowering in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events
- Clinical preventive guidelines for school-aged children and adolescents in primary care: a protocol for a systematic review
- Quality appraisal of clinical guidelines for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review
- Lobesite chez ladulte : ligne directrice de pratique clinique
- Establishing thresholds for important benefits considering the harms of screening interventions
- Guidelines on Deferred Cord Clamping and Cord Milking: A Systematic Review
- Bridging research integrity and global health epidemiology (BRIDGE) statement: guidelines for good epidemiological practice
- German Recommendations for Physical Activity and Physical Activity Promotion in Adults with Noncommunicable Diseases
- Recommandations canadiennes pour les pratiques optimales de soins de lAVC, septieme edition : lacide acetylsalicylique pour la prevention devenements vasculaires
- Various clinical practice guidelines for sports-related concussion are of sufficient methodological quality by AGREE II: a systematic review
- Assessing the process and outcome of the development of practice guidelines and recommendations: PANELVIEW instrument development
- Patient and public involvement in the development of clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review protocol
- Critical appraisal and comparison of recommendations of clinical practice guidelines for treatment of schizophrenia in children and adolescents: a methodological survey protocol
- Management in the paediatric wards facing novel coronavirus infection: a rapid review of guidelines and consensuses
- Obesity in adults: a clinical practice guideline
- Guidelines on the use of liver biopsy in clinical practice from the British Society of Gastroenterology, the Royal College of Radiologists and the Royal College of Pathology
- Adverse effects information in clinical guidelines on pharmacological treatment of depression in children and adolescents: a systematic review
- National suicide management guidelines with family as an intervention and suicide mortality rates: a systematic review protocol
- Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunt in the management of portal hypertension
- EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update
- 2019 Update of the Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA-EDTA) recommendations for the management of lupus nephritis
- Clinical practice guidelines for acute otitis media in children: a systematic review and appraisal of European national guidelines
- How should clinicians rehabilitate patients after ACL reconstruction? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with a focus on quality appraisal (AGREE II)
- Assessment of the quality, content and perceived utility of local maternity guidelines in hospitals in England implementing the saving babies lives care bundle to reduce stillbirth
- Strategies aimed at preventing chronic opioid use in trauma and acute care surgery: a scoping review protocol
- STEPP IN: Working Together to Keep Infants Warm in the Perioperative Period
- Testicular cancer: improving outcomes with national quality performance indicators
- Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations, seventh edition: acetylsalicylic acid for prevention of vascular events
- British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines
- Management of rectal cancer in Canada: an evidence-based comparison of clinical practice guidelines
- Guidelines about physical activity and exercise to reduce cardiometabolic risk factors: protocol for a systematic review and critical appraisal
- 2019 update of EULAR recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases
- British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults
- Evaluation of the NCCN guidelines using the RIGHT Statement and AGREE-II instrument: a cross-sectional review
- Methodological quality of public health guideline recommendations on vitamin D and calcium : a systematic review protocol
- Is it time to develop AGREE III?
- EULAR recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome in adults
- Breast cancer risk and breast screening for trans people: an integration of 3 systematic reviews
- Canadian guideline for Parkinson disease
- Diagnosis and treatment for hyperuricemia and gout: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements
- Patient engagement in the development of best practices for transitions from hospital to home: a scoping review
- The specification, acceptability and effectiveness of respite care and short breaks for young adults with complex healthcare needs: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review
- Assessment of the methodological quality of local clinical practice guidelines on the identification and management of gestational diabetes
- 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus
- Evaluation of the NCCN guidelines using the RIGHT Statement and AGREE II instrument: a cross-sectional review
- Evidence Underlying Recommendations and Payments from Industry to Authors of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines
- Updating quality indicators for low-risk labour care in Japan using current clinical practice guidelines: a modified Delphi method
- Diabetes Canada 2018 clinical practice guidelines: Key messages for family physicians caring for patients living with type 2 diabetes
- 2018 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis
- Lignes directrices de pratique clinique 2018 de Diabete Canada: Principaux messages a lintention des medecins de famille qui traitent les patients atteints de diabete de type 2
- Periprocedural antithrombotic management for lumbar puncture: Association of British Neurologists clinical guideline
- 2018 International Consensus Statement on Golf and Health to guide action by people, policymakers and the golf industry
- Appraising the quality standard underpinning international clinical practice guidelines for the selection and care of vascular access devices: a systematic review of reviews
- Systemic sclerosis: state of the art on clinical practice guidelines
- Sjögrens syndrome: state of the art on clinical practice guidelines