Adherence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Parkinson Disease to Trustworthy Standards: A Systematic Survey.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY Dysphagia Pub Date : 2024-09-21 DOI:10.1007/s00455-024-10755-6
Pooja Gandhi, Wimonchat Tangamornsuksan, Rachel Couban, Gordon H Guyatt, Catriona M Steele, Connie Marras
{"title":"Adherence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Parkinson Disease to Trustworthy Standards: A Systematic Survey.","authors":"Pooja Gandhi, Wimonchat Tangamornsuksan, Rachel Couban, Gordon H Guyatt, Catriona M Steele, Connie Marras","doi":"10.1007/s00455-024-10755-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the high prevalence and burden of dysphagia in Parkinson disease (PD), the availability and trustworthiness of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) regarding its assessment and management remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to appraise the quality of CPGs for dysphagia in PD. We searched OVID Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SpeechBite from January 2011 to July 2023 for guidance documents addressing screening, referral, monitoring, assessment, or management of dysphagia in PD. We additionally conducted an informal search of web pages of relevant professional societies and government organizations. Paired reviewers independently screened studies, and for relevant guidance documents, abstracted data and assessed their quality using the National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards instrument. Thirteen CPGs proved eligible. Of these, eight (62%) were developed by professional societies. Overall, CPGs were deemed low quality. Eleven (85%) CPGs reported funding sources, and nine (69%) reported conflicts of interest. Five (35%) guidance documents included a methodologist, four (30%) included patient partners, four (30%) described study selection processes, and two (15%) clearly described relevant benefits and harms. Regarding dysphagia-specific recommendations, less than half of guidance documents met standards for trustworthiness; six (46%) provided a synthesis of available evidence, eight (54%) specified strength of recommendations, and two (15%) articulated unambiguous recommendations. Limited guidance exists regarding screening, monitoring and referral for dysphagia in PD. Existing guidance frequently fails to meet standards for trustworthiness. International, multidisciplinary, evidence-based practice guidelines with adequate methodological and patient partner involvement are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":11508,"journal":{"name":"Dysphagia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dysphagia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-024-10755-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the high prevalence and burden of dysphagia in Parkinson disease (PD), the availability and trustworthiness of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) regarding its assessment and management remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to appraise the quality of CPGs for dysphagia in PD. We searched OVID Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SpeechBite from January 2011 to July 2023 for guidance documents addressing screening, referral, monitoring, assessment, or management of dysphagia in PD. We additionally conducted an informal search of web pages of relevant professional societies and government organizations. Paired reviewers independently screened studies, and for relevant guidance documents, abstracted data and assessed their quality using the National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards instrument. Thirteen CPGs proved eligible. Of these, eight (62%) were developed by professional societies. Overall, CPGs were deemed low quality. Eleven (85%) CPGs reported funding sources, and nine (69%) reported conflicts of interest. Five (35%) guidance documents included a methodologist, four (30%) included patient partners, four (30%) described study selection processes, and two (15%) clearly described relevant benefits and harms. Regarding dysphagia-specific recommendations, less than half of guidance documents met standards for trustworthiness; six (46%) provided a synthesis of available evidence, eight (54%) specified strength of recommendations, and two (15%) articulated unambiguous recommendations. Limited guidance exists regarding screening, monitoring and referral for dysphagia in PD. Existing guidance frequently fails to meet standards for trustworthiness. International, multidisciplinary, evidence-based practice guidelines with adequate methodological and patient partner involvement are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帕金森病口咽吞咽困难临床实践指南是否符合可信标准:系统调查。
尽管吞咽困难在帕金森病(PD)中的发病率和负担很高,但有关其评估和管理的临床实践指南(CPG)的可用性和可信度仍不确定。本研究旨在评估帕金森病吞咽困难临床实践指南的质量。我们检索了 2011 年 1 月至 2023 年 7 月期间 OVID Medline、Embase、CINAHL 和 SpeechBite 中有关 PD 吞咽困难筛查、转诊、监测、评估或管理的指导文件。此外,我们还对相关专业协会和政府组织的网页进行了非正式检索。配对审稿人独立筛选研究,对于相关的指导性文件,则使用国家指南信息交换中心的 "可信标准遵守程度 "工具摘录数据并评估其质量。有 13 份国家指导文件符合条件。其中,8 份(62%)由专业协会制定。总体而言,CPG 的质量较低。有 11 份(85%)CPG 报告了资金来源,9 份(69%)报告了利益冲突。五份(35%)指导文件包括一名方法论专家,四份(30%)包括患者合作伙伴,四份(30%)描述了研究选择过程,两份(15%)明确描述了相关的益处和危害。关于吞咽困难的具体建议,只有不到一半的指导文件达到了可信度标准;六份(46%)文件对现有证据进行了综述,八份(54%)文件明确了建议的力度,两份(15%)文件明确提出了建议。关于腹膜透析患者吞咽困难的筛查、监测和转诊的指导有限。现有指南往往不符合可信度标准。需要制定国际性、多学科、循证实践指南,并充分考虑方法和患者伙伴的参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Dysphagia
Dysphagia 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
15.40%
发文量
149
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Dysphagia aims to serve as a voice for the benefit of the patient. The journal is devoted exclusively to swallowing and its disorders. The purpose of the journal is to provide a source of information to the flourishing dysphagia community. Over the past years, the field of dysphagia has grown rapidly, and the community of dysphagia researchers have galvanized with ambition to represent dysphagia patients. In addition to covering a myriad of disciplines in medicine and speech pathology, the following topics are also covered, but are not limited to: bio-engineering, deglutition, esophageal motility, immunology, and neuro-gastroenterology. The journal aims to foster a growing need for further dysphagia investigation, to disseminate knowledge through research, and to stimulate communication among interested professionals. The journal publishes original papers, technical and instrumental notes, letters to the editor, and review articles.
期刊最新文献
A Pilot Study of a Modified Swallowing Screening Tool for Critically Ill Patients in the Intensive Care Unit. Upper Esophageal Sphincter Abnormalities and Esophageal Motility Recovery After Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Achalasia. Clinical Conundrum: Swallowing Virtual Reality as a Novel Diagnostic Tool for Severe Dysphagia after Deep Neck Infection. Concerns Regarding GPi DBS and Mild Dysphagia in Parkinson's Disease. Relationship between Quality of Life and Swallowing in Hypertensive Individuals with Obstructive Sleep Apnea.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1