Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for nutrition in critically ill adults: A cross-sectional study

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to provide reference for improving the quality of future guidelines by evaluating present guidelines for nutrition in critically ill adults using Report Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II). MethodsElectronic databases and guideline websites published from 2000 to 2020 were searched. We examined the included guidelines according to RIGHT and AGREE II. ResultsTen guidelines were involved in the study. Among seven domains of RIGHT, background received the highest report rate, whereas review and quality assurance received the lowest. Items 1a, 1c, 6, 7a, 7b were reported by all included guidelines, and items 3, 8b, 14a, 16, 18b, 21 were barely reported. As for AGREE II, scores of six domains were 69% (scope and purpose), 34% (stakeholder involvement), 47% (rigor of development), 71% (clarity of presentation), 20% (applicability), and 52% (editorial independence), respectively. ConclusionReport and methodological quality of guidelines for nutrition in critically ill adults were relatively high. The evaluation results of RIGHT and AGREE II are consistent, with higher scores in the field of background and lower scores in the part on quality control and applicability. To facilitate application of guidelines, RIGHT and AGREE II should be used as criteria by guideline developers.