An Evaluation of Evidence Underpinning Management Recommendations in Tobacco Use Disorder Clinical Practice Guidelines.
Journal
Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco
ISSN: 1469-994X
Titre abrégé: Nicotine Tob Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815751
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 04 2022
28 04 2022
Historique:
received:
02
07
2021
revised:
24
09
2021
accepted:
10
01
2022
pubmed:
14
1
2022
medline:
3
5
2022
entrez:
13
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Clinical practice guidelines(CPGs) are important tools for medical decision-making. Given the high prevalence and financial burden associated with tobacco use disorder(TUD), it is critical that recommendations within CPGs are based on robust evidence. Systematic reviews(SRs) are considered the highest level of evidence, thus, we evaluated the quality of SRs underpinning CPG recommendations for TUD. We used PubMed to search for CPGs relating to TUD published between January 1, 2010 and May 21, 2021. SRs were extracted from CPG references and evaluated using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA) and A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews(AMSTAR-2) tools. We then compared SRs conducted by the Cochrane Collaboration with non-Cochrane SRs using a Mann-Whitney U test and determined associations between PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 extracted characteristics using multiple regression. Our search generated 10 CPGs with 98 SRs extracted. Mean PRISMA completion was 74.7%(SD = 16.7) and mean AMSTAR-2 completion was 53.8%(SD = 22.0) across all guidelines. Cochrane SRs were more complete than non-Cochrane studies in the PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 assessments. The regression model showed a statistically significant association between PRISMA completion and AMSTAR-2 rating, with those classified as "low" or "moderate" quality having higher PRISMA completion than those with "critically low" ratings. We found substandard adherence to PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 checklists across SRs cited in TUD CPGs. A lack of recent SRs in CPGs could lead to outdated recommendations. Therefore, frequent guideline updates with recently published evidence may ensure more accurate clinical recommendations and improve patient care. Systematic reviews used to underpin clinical practice guideline recommendations influence treatment decisions and, ultimately, patient outcomes. We found that many systematic reviews underpinning tobacco use disorder guideline recommendations were out of date and unsatisfactory in reporting and quality. Thus, including newer systematic reviews containing more recently conducted trials and better reporting could alter recommendations and improve the rate of successful tobacco cessation attempts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35023556
pii: 6505232
doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntac012
pmc: PMC9048867
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
847-854Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
BMJ. 2015 Jan 02;350:g7647
pubmed: 25555855
Clin Obes. 2017 Feb;7(1):34-45
pubmed: 28112500
Healthcare (Basel). 2020 Nov 01;8(4):
pubmed: 33139623
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 3;12(8):e0181927
pubmed: 28771633
Am J Health Promot. 2021 Mar;35(3):442-455
pubmed: 33327728
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Dec 3;12:CD013413
pubmed: 33284989
Addict Behav. 2021 Jan;112:106616
pubmed: 32932102
Heliyon. 2020 Sep 01;6(9):e04776
pubmed: 32939412
Med Care. 2007 Apr;45(4):350-6
pubmed: 17496719
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2006 Nov 10;55(44):1194-7
pubmed: 17093384
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 13;18(8):
pubmed: 33924379
Curr Hypertens Rep. 2020 Nov 23;23(1):2
pubmed: 33230755
S Afr Med J. 2013 Sep 30;103(11):869-76
pubmed: 24148176
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Oct 20;163(8):622-34
pubmed: 26389730
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 16;15(12):e0243091
pubmed: 33326429
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016 Nov;14(11):1430-1468
pubmed: 27799513
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2020 Aug;25(4):138-142
pubmed: 31672699
BMJ Open. 2018 Mar 25;8(3):e020869
pubmed: 29581210
Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 19;6(1):263
pubmed: 29258593
Anesth Analg. 2020 Sep;131(3):955-968
pubmed: 31764157
J Clin Psychiatry. 2011 Aug;72(8):1136-43
pubmed: 21295000
BMJ. 2017 Sep 21;358:j4008
pubmed: 28935701
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 14;10:CD010216
pubmed: 33052602
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Jan;129:97-103
pubmed: 33049325
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Jul 22;8(7):e17039
pubmed: 32706724
JAMA. 2021 Jan 19;325(3):265-279
pubmed: 33464343
Sci Total Environ. 2021 Jun 10;772:145486
pubmed: 33770882
Nicotine Tob Res. 2021 Feb 16;23(3):415-425
pubmed: 32905589
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 19;2:CD005084
pubmed: 33605440
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2018 Feb 7;18(1):25
pubmed: 29415680
Front Aging Neurosci. 2020 Nov 25;12:594432
pubmed: 33324194
Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Dec;35(12):1828-1835
pubmed: 28623004
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 24;17(17):
pubmed: 32847119
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1021-30
pubmed: 19282144
Addict Behav. 2021 Feb;113:106676
pubmed: 33038676
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Jul 15;202(2):e5-e31
pubmed: 32663106
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015 Aug 13;15:63
pubmed: 26268372
Diabetes Care. 2020 May;43(5):1146-1156
pubmed: 32312858