Insight into the methodology and uptake of EAES guidelines: a qualitative analysis and survey by the EAES Consensus & Guideline Subcommittee.
Awareness
Clinical practice guidelines
EAES
Laparoscopy
Use
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2021
03 2021
Historique:
received:
31
01
2020
accepted:
02
03
2020
pubmed:
3
4
2020
medline:
21
7
2021
entrez:
3
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Over the past 25 years, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has been issuing clinical guidance documents to aid surgical practice. We aimed to investigate the awareness and use of such documents among EAES members. Additionally, we conceptually appraised the methodology used in their development in order to propose a bundle of actions for quality improvement and increased penetration of clinical practice guidelines among EAES members. We invited members of EAES to participate in a web-based survey on awareness and use of these documents. Post hoc analyses were performed to identify factors associated with poor awareness/use and the reported reasons for limited use. We further summarized and conceptually analyzed key methodological features of clinical guidance documents published by EAES. Three distinct consecutive phases of methodological evolvement of clinical guidance documents were evident: a "consensus phase," a "guideline phase," and a "transitional phase". Out of a total of 254 surgeons who completed the survey, 72% percent were aware of EAES guidelines and 47% reported occasional use. Young age and trainee status were associated with poor awareness and use. Restriction by colleagues was the primary reason for limited use in these subgroups. The methodology of EAES clinical guidance documents is evolving. Awareness among EAES members is fair, but use is limited. Dissemination actions should be directed to junior surgeons and trainees.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Over the past 25 years, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has been issuing clinical guidance documents to aid surgical practice. We aimed to investigate the awareness and use of such documents among EAES members. Additionally, we conceptually appraised the methodology used in their development in order to propose a bundle of actions for quality improvement and increased penetration of clinical practice guidelines among EAES members.
METHODS
We invited members of EAES to participate in a web-based survey on awareness and use of these documents. Post hoc analyses were performed to identify factors associated with poor awareness/use and the reported reasons for limited use. We further summarized and conceptually analyzed key methodological features of clinical guidance documents published by EAES.
RESULTS
Three distinct consecutive phases of methodological evolvement of clinical guidance documents were evident: a "consensus phase," a "guideline phase," and a "transitional phase". Out of a total of 254 surgeons who completed the survey, 72% percent were aware of EAES guidelines and 47% reported occasional use. Young age and trainee status were associated with poor awareness and use. Restriction by colleagues was the primary reason for limited use in these subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS
The methodology of EAES clinical guidance documents is evolving. Awareness among EAES members is fair, but use is limited. Dissemination actions should be directed to junior surgeons and trainees.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32240381
doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07494-8
pii: 10.1007/s00464-020-07494-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1238-1246Investigateurs
Stavros A Antoniou
(SA)
Ferdinando Agresta
(F)
Marguerite Gorter-Stam
(M)
Andreas Shamiyeh
(A)
George Theodoropoulos
(G)
Références
Atkins D, Eccles M, Flottorp S et al (2004) Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches. GRADE Working Group 7:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-4-38
doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-4-38
Alhazzani W, Guyatt G (2018) An overview of the GRADE approach and a peek at the future. Med J Aust 209(7):291–292. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja18.00012
doi: 10.5694/mja18.00012
pubmed: 30257627
Larsen PO, von Ins M (2010) The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by science citation index. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z
doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z
pubmed: 20700371
pmcid: 2909426
EAES. European Association for Endoscopic Surgery Consensus & Guideline Subcommittee. https://eaes.eu/consensus-guideline-subcommittee/ .
EAES (2019) Consensus conferences. https://eaes.eu/publications/consensus-conferences/ . Accessed 29 Dec, 2019
Neugebauer E, Troidl H, Kum CK, Eypasch E, Miserez M, Paul A (1995) The EAES Consensus development conferences on laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and hernia repair—consensus statements—September 1994 the Educational Committee of the European association for endoscopic surgery and other interventional t. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00206852
doi: 10.1007/BF00206852
pubmed: 7676385
Eypasch E, Neugebauer E, Fischer F, Troidi H (1997) Laparoscopic antireflux surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): results of a consensus development conference. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004649900382
doi: 10.1007/s004649900382
pubmed: 9373303
Paul A, Millat B, Holthausen U, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E (1998) Diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS): results of a consensus development conference. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004649900729
doi: 10.1007/s004649900729
Köhler L, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E (1999) Diagnosis and treatment of diverticular disease: results of a consensus development conference. The Scientific Committee of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 13(4):430–436
doi: 10.1007/s004649901007
Fingerhut A, Millat B, Bataille N et al (2001) Laparoscopic hernia repair in 2000: update of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) consensus conference in Madrid, June 1994. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000382
doi: 10.1007/s004640000382
pubmed: 11961661
Neudecker J, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E et al (2002) The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery clinical practice guideline on the pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 16(7):1121–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-9166-7
doi: 10.1007/s00464-001-9166-7
pubmed: 12015619
Korolija D, Sauerland S, Wood-Dauphinée S et al (2004) Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9263-x
doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-9263-x
Veldkamp R, Gholghesaei M, Bonjer HJ et al (2004) Laparoscopic resection of colon cancer: consensus of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-8253-3
doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-8253-3
Sauerland S, Angrisani L, Belachew M et al (2005) Obesity surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-9194-1
doi: 10.1007/s00464-004-9194-1
Sauerland S, Agresta F, Bergamaschi R et al (2006) Laparoscopy for abdominal emergencies. Evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 20(1):14–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0564-0
doi: 10.1007/s00464-005-0564-0
pubmed: 16247571
Habermalz B, Sauerland S, Decker G et al (2008) Laparoscopic splenectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9735-5
doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9735-5
Neugebauer EAM, Becker M, Buess GF et al (2010) EAES recommendations on methodology of innovation management in endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0818-3
doi: 10.1007/s00464-009-0818-3
pubmed: 20054575
Siegel R, Cuesta MA, Targarona E et al (2011) Laparoscopic extraperitoneal rectal cancer surgery: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1805-z
doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1805-z
pubmed: 21701921
Poelman MM, Van Den Heuvel B, Deelder JD et al (2013) EAES consensus development conference on endoscopic repair of groin hernias. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 27(10):3505–3519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3001-9
doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3001-9
Fuchs KH, Babic B, Breithaupt W et al (2014) EAES recommendations for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3431-z
doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3431-z
pubmed: 25539698
Szold A, Bergamaschi R, Broeders I et al (2015) European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 29(2):253–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3916-9
doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3916-9
Morino M, Risio M, Bach S et al (2015) Early rectal cancer: the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) clinical consensus conference. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4067-3
doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4067-3
pubmed: 26304106
Gorter RR, Eker HH, Gorter-Stam MAW et al (2016) Diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015. Surg Endosc 30(11):4668–4690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5245-7
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5245-7
pubmed: 27660247
pmcid: 5082605
Edwin B, Sahakyan MA, Abu Hilal M et al (2017) Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic neoplasms: the European association for endoscopic surgery clinical consensus conference. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5414-3
doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5414-3
pubmed: 28916919
Arezzo A, Vettoretto N, Francis NK et al (2018) The use of 3D laparoscopic imaging systems in surgery: EAES consensus development conference 2018. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-06612-x
doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06612-x
pubmed: 30515610
pmcid: 5956063
Morales-Conde S, Peeters A, Meyer YM et al (2019) European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 33(4):996–1019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06693-2
doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06693-2
pubmed: 30771069
pmcid: 6430755
Francis NK, Sylla P, Abou-Khalil M et al (2019) EAES and SAGES 2018 consensus conference on acute diverticulitis management: evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06882-z
doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06882-z
pubmed: 31628621
pmcid: 7271015
Agresta F, Ansaloni L, Baiocchi GL et al (2012) Laparoscopic approach to acute abdomen from the consensus development conference of the Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e nuove tecnologie (SICE), Associazione Chirurghi Ospedalieri Italiani (ACOI), Società Italiana di Chirurgia (SIC), Società Italiana di Chirurgia d’Urgenza e del Trauma (SICUT) Società Italiana di Chirurgia nell’Ospedalità. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2331-3
doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2331-3
pubmed: 22736283
OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group, Durieux N, Pasleau F, Howick J (2011) The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence. Group. 1(version):5653. https://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1025 .
Guyatt GH (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926
World Health Organization (2017) WHO handbook for guideline development. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/75146/1/9789241548441_eng.pdf . Published 2012. Accessed 2 Oct, 2017
Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al (2011) The GRADE approach. In: Higgins JP, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5. https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter_12/12_2_1_the_grade_approach.htm .
NICE (2017) The guidelines manual|Guidance and guidelines|NICE. https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg6/chapter/reviewing-the-evidence . Accessed 2 Oct, 2017
Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP et al (2010) AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. J Clin Epidemiol 63(12):1308–1311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.001
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.001
pubmed: 20656455
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al (2008) Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39493.646875.AE
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39493.646875.AE
pubmed: 18669566
pmcid: 2394579
Elena R, Evaluation T (2008) GRADE: grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ 336:1106–1110
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39500.677199.AE
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al (2008) GRADE: incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39504.506319.80
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39504.506319.80
pubmed: 18669566
pmcid: 2394579
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.03.017
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.03.017
pubmed: 22200346
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.04.014
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.04.014
pubmed: 22200346
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 64:1311–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.004
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.004
pubmed: 21802902