文章摘要
王少烽,彭晓霞,汤春波.基于AGREE Ⅱ评价2篇口腔医学临床实践指南的比较研究[J].南京医科大学学报,2017,(4):442~446
基于AGREE Ⅱ评价2篇口腔医学临床实践指南的比较研究
Comparison between two clinical practice guidelines on stomatology using AGREE Ⅱ tool
投稿时间:2016-11-04  
DOI:10.7655/NYDXBNS20170412
中文关键词: 口腔医学  临床实践指南  AGREE Ⅱ  循证医学
英文关键词: stomatology  clinical practice guideline  AGREE Ⅱ  evidence-based medicine
基金项目:国家自然科学基金(81470778);江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助(2014-37)
作者单位
王少烽 南京医科大学口腔疾病研究江苏省重点实验室南京医科大学口腔医学院江苏 南京 210029 
彭晓霞 首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院临床流行病学与循证医学中心北京 100045 
汤春波 南京医科大学口腔疾病研究江苏省重点实验室南京医科大学附属口腔医院种植修复科江苏 南京 210029 
摘要点击次数: 1179
全文下载次数: 864
中文摘要:
      目的:以口腔医学领域2016年最新发表的2篇临床实践指南为例,分析我国临床实践指南尚存在的局限,为提高我国口腔医学领域临床指南制订和指南更新的质量提供方法学参考。方法:通过计算机检索PubMed、中国知网、万方数据库、GuideLine和医脉通数据库,分别检索于2016年发表的口腔领域英文和中文临床实践指南,采用AGREE Ⅱ质量评价工具进行评价,然后进行描述性比较分析。结果:中文指南只有1篇《显微根管治疗技术指南》,我们选择了美国同期发表的1篇英文指南《循证临床实践指南:窝沟封闭剂的应用》。对照AGREE Ⅱ工具6个领域23个条目,《循证临床实践指南:窝沟封闭剂的应用》符合22个条目的要求,未达要求者为1个条目;《显微根管治疗技术指南》仅符合1个条目的要求,未达到22条目的要求。结论:相对于美国的循证临床实践指南,我国的指南在开发过程中尚未满足循证指南制定的要求,提示我国临床专家在制定临床实践指南时应重视临床实践指南开发过程的透明性、方法学严谨性。
英文摘要:
      Objective:The present study is aimed to evaluate the quality of two clinical practice guidelines on stomatology published lately in China and overseas so that the limitations of development of clinical practive guideline in China could be emphasized,which will be helpful to improve the methodological quality to develope evidence-based guide line and to update the current guidelines in the future. Methods:Guidelines on stomatology published from 2014 to 2016 were electronically searched in PubMed,Wanfang,CNKI and databases of National Guideline Clearing house. One guideline on stomatology developed in China and another one developed overseas were selected. The quality was evaluated by the AGREE II tool and then descriptive analysis was performed. Results:Only one clinical practice guideline on stomatology was published in China. i. e. Guidelines for the use of microscopes in endodontics in 2016. Another clinical practice guideline(Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants) developed in USA was selected. Based on 23 items organized into the original 6 quality domains,the selected foreign guideline was deemed to conform to 22 items except for 1 item. The selected domestic guideline did only conform to 1 item. Conclusion:Compared with the Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants developed in USA,the domestic clinical practice guideline has not yet conformed to the procedure to develop the evidence-based clinical practice guideline,which indicates that domestic stomatology experts should emphasize the transparency and methodology rigor when they develop new clinical practice guidelines.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器