对成人家庭肠管饲喂指南和建议的系统回顾和质量评估。

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS European Journal of Clinical Nutrition Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1038/s41430-024-01500-1
Andriana Korai, Isabella Thomson, Sharon Carey, Margaret Allman-Farinelli
{"title":"对成人家庭肠管饲喂指南和建议的系统回顾和质量评估。","authors":"Andriana Korai, Isabella Thomson, Sharon Carey, Margaret Allman-Farinelli","doi":"10.1038/s41430-024-01500-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Home Enteral Tube Feeding (HETF) is a viable option for people within primary care settings when oral intake is insufficient to meet nutritional needs. As HETF is not a risk-free therapy, guidelines exist to enable its safe provision. This review aims to summarise existing guidelines and their recommendations pertaining to the provision of HETF and appraise their methodological quality. A systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, PRISMA-checklist and a 2019 methodological guide specific to the review of clinical practice guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023456223). Records were sourced from five bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, Cinahl) and the grey literature (64 websites, seven guideline repositories). The AGREE-II tool was applied to eligible guidelines. The recommendations of guidelines meeting a predetermined threshold score (domain 3 'rigour of development' score >70%) were extracted, grouped, and assessed using the AGREE-REX tool. A total of 2707 records were screened with 15 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-II score (/7) of all guidelines was 3 (3-5) and only 3/15 guidelines achieved a domain 3 score >70%. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-REX score was 33% (26-37%). No recommendation group achieved a domain score above 70%. No guideline or recommendation group was suggested for use without modification. Key limitations included suboptimal stakeholder involvement and implementability, and lack of methodological transparency. Current HETF guidelines inadequately align with methodological standards. This review highlights key areas HETF guideline developers should consider to create more relevant and implementable guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":11927,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review and quality appraisal of guidelines and recommendations for home enteral tube feeding in adults.\",\"authors\":\"Andriana Korai, Isabella Thomson, Sharon Carey, Margaret Allman-Farinelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41430-024-01500-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Home Enteral Tube Feeding (HETF) is a viable option for people within primary care settings when oral intake is insufficient to meet nutritional needs. As HETF is not a risk-free therapy, guidelines exist to enable its safe provision. This review aims to summarise existing guidelines and their recommendations pertaining to the provision of HETF and appraise their methodological quality. A systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, PRISMA-checklist and a 2019 methodological guide specific to the review of clinical practice guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023456223). Records were sourced from five bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, Cinahl) and the grey literature (64 websites, seven guideline repositories). The AGREE-II tool was applied to eligible guidelines. The recommendations of guidelines meeting a predetermined threshold score (domain 3 'rigour of development' score >70%) were extracted, grouped, and assessed using the AGREE-REX tool. A total of 2707 records were screened with 15 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-II score (/7) of all guidelines was 3 (3-5) and only 3/15 guidelines achieved a domain 3 score >70%. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-REX score was 33% (26-37%). No recommendation group achieved a domain score above 70%. No guideline or recommendation group was suggested for use without modification. Key limitations included suboptimal stakeholder involvement and implementability, and lack of methodological transparency. Current HETF guidelines inadequately align with methodological standards. This review highlights key areas HETF guideline developers should consider to create more relevant and implementable guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Nutrition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-024-01500-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-024-01500-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当口服摄入量不足以满足营养需求时,家庭肠内插管喂养(HETF)是基层医疗机构的一种可行选择。由于 HETF 并非一种无风险的疗法,因此需要制定相关指南,以便安全地提供 HETF。本综述旨在总结有关提供 HETF 的现有指南及其建议,并评估其方法学质量。我们根据《Cochrane 系统综述手册》、PRISMA-检查表和 2019 年临床实践指南综述方法指南(PROSPERO 注册:CRD42023456223)进行了系统综述。记录来自五个文献数据库(Medline、Embase、PsychINFO、Scopus、Cinahl)和灰色文献(64 个网站、七个指南库)。AGREE-II 工具适用于符合条件的指南。对达到预定阈值(领域 3 "开发的严谨性 "得分大于 70%)的指南建议进行提取、分组,并使用 AGREE-REX 工具进行评估。共筛选出 2707 条记录,其中 15 份指南符合资格标准。所有指南的 AGREE-II 总得分(/7)的中位数(IQR)为 3(3-5),只有 3/15 份指南的领域 3 得分超过 70%。AGREE-REX 总分的中位数(IQR)为 33% (26-37%)。没有一个建议组的领域得分超过 70%。没有任何指南或建议组被建议在不做修改的情况下使用。主要局限性包括利益相关者的参与度和可实施性不够理想,以及方法缺乏透明度。当前的 HETF 准则与方法标准不完全一致。本综述强调了 HETF 指南制定者应考虑的关键领域,以便制定出更具相关性和可实施性的指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
A systematic review and quality appraisal of guidelines and recommendations for home enteral tube feeding in adults.

Home Enteral Tube Feeding (HETF) is a viable option for people within primary care settings when oral intake is insufficient to meet nutritional needs. As HETF is not a risk-free therapy, guidelines exist to enable its safe provision. This review aims to summarise existing guidelines and their recommendations pertaining to the provision of HETF and appraise their methodological quality. A systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, PRISMA-checklist and a 2019 methodological guide specific to the review of clinical practice guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023456223). Records were sourced from five bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, Cinahl) and the grey literature (64 websites, seven guideline repositories). The AGREE-II tool was applied to eligible guidelines. The recommendations of guidelines meeting a predetermined threshold score (domain 3 'rigour of development' score >70%) were extracted, grouped, and assessed using the AGREE-REX tool. A total of 2707 records were screened with 15 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-II score (/7) of all guidelines was 3 (3-5) and only 3/15 guidelines achieved a domain 3 score >70%. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-REX score was 33% (26-37%). No recommendation group achieved a domain score above 70%. No guideline or recommendation group was suggested for use without modification. Key limitations included suboptimal stakeholder involvement and implementability, and lack of methodological transparency. Current HETF guidelines inadequately align with methodological standards. This review highlights key areas HETF guideline developers should consider to create more relevant and implementable guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.10%
发文量
189
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (EJCN) is an international, peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of human and clinical nutrition. The journal welcomes original research, reviews, case reports and brief communications based on clinical, metabolic and epidemiological studies that describe methodologies, mechanisms, associations and benefits of nutritional interventions for clinical disease and health promotion. Topics of interest include but are not limited to: Nutrition and Health (including climate and ecological aspects) Metabolism & Metabolomics Genomics and personalized strategies in nutrition Nutrition during the early life cycle Health issues and nutrition in the elderly Phenotyping in clinical nutrition Nutrition in acute and chronic diseases The double burden of ''malnutrition'': Under-nutrition and Obesity Prevention of Non Communicable Diseases (NCD)
期刊最新文献
Protein-energetic malnutrition hinders malaria vaccine-derived cellular and class-switched antibody responses against the Plasmodium vivax circumsporozoite protein in mice. Associations between perinatal biomarkers of maternal dairy fat intake and child cognitive development: results from the EDEN mother-child cohort. The prolonged impact of swapping non-fermented with fermented dairy products on cardiovascular disease: the ATTICA cohort study (2002-2022). Efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics supplementation on chemotherapy-induced complications and gut microbiota dysbiosis in gastrointestinal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intake of animal and plant proteins and risk of all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: results from NHANES.
×
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