ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Guidance documents are a valuable resource to clinicians to guide evidenced-based decision making. The quality of guidelines in anaesthesia and across other specialties has been demonstrated to be poor. COVID-19 presented an urgent need for immediate guidance for anaesthetists as frontline clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of COVID-19 guidance documents using the internationally validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. METHODS: A search was conducted in Ovid EMBASE and Ovid MEDLINE to identify all COVID-19 anaesthesia guidance documents from 2020-2021. Thirty-eight guidance documents were selected for analysis by 4 independent appraisers using the AGREE II instrument, across its 6 domains and 23 items. A scoring threshold for high quality was agreed by the working group via consensus. RESULTS: Overall, the body of COVID-19 guidance documents achieved poor scores using AGREE II. Only 5% of documents met the high-quality criteria. Markers of quality included international and multi-institutional collaboration. Document title ('guideline' vs 'consensus statement'/ 'recommendations') did not yield any differences in domain scores and overall quality ratings. Compared with recent general anaesthesia guidelines, COVID-19 guidelines performed significantly worse. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 guidance documents published during the first two years of the pandemic lacked rigour and appropriate quality. This raises concern about their trustworthiness for use in clinical practice. Enhanced systems are required to ensure the integrity of rapidly formulated guidance.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia , COVID-19 , Humans , ConsensusABSTRACT
Guidance documents are a valuable resource to clinicians to guide evidenced-based decision making. The quality of guidelines in anaesthesia and across other specialties has been demonstrated to be poor. COVID-19 presented an urgent need for immediate guidance for anaesthetists as frontline clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of COVID-19 guidance documents using the internationally validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. A search was conducted in Ovid EMBASE and Ovid MEDLINE to identify all COVID-19 anaesthesia guidance documents from 2020-2021. Thirty-eight guidance documents were selected for analysis by 4 independent appraisers using the AGREE II instrument, across its 6 domains and 23 items. A scoring threshold for high quality was agreed by the working group via consensus. Overall, the body of COVID-19 guidance documents achieved poor scores using AGREE II. Only 5% of documents met the high-quality criteria. Markers of quality included international and multi-institutional collaboration. Document title (‘guideline’ vs ‘consensus statement’/’recommendations’) did not yield any differences in domain scores and overall quality ratings. Compared with recent general anaesthesia guidelines, COVID-19 guidelines performed significantly worse. COVID-19 guidance documents published during the first two years of the pandemic lacked rigour and appropriate quality. This raises concern about their trustworthiness for use in clinical practice. Enhanced systems are required to ensure the integrity of rapidly formulated guidance.
ABSTRACT
The European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology (EACTA) and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) aimed to create joint recommendations for the perioperative management of patients with suspected or proven severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection undergoing cardiac surgery or invasive cardiac procedures. To produce appropriate recommendations, the authors combined the evidence from the literature review, reevaluating the clinical experience of routine cardiac surgery in similar cases during the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) outbreak and the current pandemic with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, and the expert opinions through broad discussions within the EACTA and SCA. The authors took into consideration the balance between established procedures and the feasibility during the present outbreak. The authors present an agreement between the European and US practices in managing patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The recommendations take into consideration a broad spectrum of issues, with a focus on preoperative testing, safety concerns, overall approaches to general and specific aspects of preparation for anesthesia, airway management, transesophageal echocardiography, perioperative ventilation, coagulation, hemodynamic control, and postoperative care. As the COVID-19 pandemic is spreading, it will continue to present a challenge for the worldwide anesthesiology community. To allow these recommendations to be updated as long as possible, the authors provided weblinks to international public and academic sources providing timely updated data. This document should be the basis of future task forces to develop a more comprehensive consensus considering new evidence uncovered during the COVID-19 pandemic.