The quality of guidelines on the end-of-life care: a systematic quality appraisal using AGREE II instrument

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Guidelines are intended to facilitate knowledge translation and evidence-based clinical decision-making, but they vary in methodological rigor and quality. The present study was conducted to assess the quality of guidelines available on end-of-life care in patients with cancer using AGREE II. METHODS: A comprehensive search was carried out in EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database), MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and gray literature sources until December 2016. The quality of the guidelines was assessed independently by five appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition (AGREE II). To promote consistency with available studies using AGREE II and identify high-quality guidelines, the AGREE II scores were also categorized as "Strongly recommended," "Recommended with modifications," or "Not recommended." RESULTS: A total of 8 guidelines were included in this study. Five of the guidelines were developed based on evidence and two by consensus and one provided no information about its method of development. The highest mean score (82.77) pertained to "Clarity of presentation" and the lowest to "Editorial independence" (44.80). Based on the AGREE II results, three guidelines were "Strongly recommended," four were "Recommended with modifications," and one was "Not recommended." CONCLUSION: Despite the variations in the quality and strength of the recommendations, a number of guidelines are currently available on end-of-life care. Health team members should be aware of this variability.