Abstract
To evaluate the quality of a clinical protocol for family planning care for people living with HIV/AIDS. An evaluative study based on the six domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II and on Pearson's Coefficient of Variation. The protocol reached between 88.8% and 100.0% quality in the domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II and 93.3% in the overall evaluation. The obtained Pearson's coefficient of variation was between zero and 18.6. Considering that a minimum percentage of 70.0% was adopted for the quality attributed by the evaluators, quality has been achieved for all domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II. As a coefficient for all domains was less than 25%, we can infer that the scores attributed by the evaluators were linear or homogeneous, meaning high agreement between them. The protocol was evaluated as a quality instrument, recommended for use by health professionals who deal with family planning for people living with HIV/AIDS.
Highlights
Protocols are recommendations that must be developed in an organized way based on the best scientific information, thereby aiding in the clinical management of a problem or health condition
A structured review of the scientific literature was carried out in order to identify the prospect of effective instruments that guarantee the quality of clinical protocols, listing several instruments that enable evaluating the quality of a clinical protocol, where the most reliable, tested and recommended were the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II), a checklist drawn up by the World Health Organization (WHO); and another one elaborated by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC)(3)
The planning care to people living with HIV/AIDS (PAPHA) presented satisfactory quality in the evaluation, since the percentages of quality attributed by the evaluators were higher than the cut-off point adopted by the authors (70.0%), reaching 96.6% in domain 1 – scope and purpose; 88.8% in domain 2 – stakeholder involvement; 96.2% in domain 3 – rigour of development; 95.5% in domain 4 – clarity of presentation; 89.1% in domain 5 – applicability; and 100.0% in domain 6 – editorial independence
Summary
Protocols are recommendations that must be developed in an organized way based on the best scientific information, thereby aiding in the clinical management of a problem or health condition They become tools to be used in the health area, reducing inappropriate variations in clinical practice(1). Despite the relevance of implementing protocols in clinical practice and its positive impact on the improvement of the outcomes among patients, the development of these instruments continues to lack clearly articulated objectives, coherent structures, reliable evaluation and implementation mechanisms, adding good quality and the best cost-effectiveness to health care(2). A structured review of the scientific literature was carried out in order to identify the prospect of effective instruments that guarantee the quality of clinical protocols, listing several instruments that enable evaluating the quality of a clinical protocol, where the most reliable, tested and recommended were the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II), a checklist drawn up by the World Health Organization (WHO); and another one elaborated by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC)(3)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
