The Quality of Six Clinical Practice Guidelines in Health and Social Sciences: Are We on the Right Track?

Abstract

Interest in the development and promotion of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) continues to grow in many professions. However, the potential benefits associated with CPGs are dependent upon their quality. A number of studies have shown that the quality of CPGs varies greatly. Furthermore, the quality of many of the CPGs used in health and social sciences has yet to be examined. In light of this, the aim of this study was to examine the quality of CPGs that focus on intervention and care management in mental health in Quebec. A search of Quebec regulatory bodies websites was conducted and six CPGs were included in this study. The CPGs were assessed by four trained raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Items scores and domains scores were considered to determine the quality of the six CPGs. Results show that many of the CPGs did not achieve minimum ratings for numerous quality checks. Notably, none of the CPGs were designed using a rigorous methodology, they lacked transparency throughout the development process and insufficient consideration was given to the applicability of the recommendations they included. Because these shortcomings may hinder the efficacy and utilization of CPGs, suggestions to improve the development of CPGs and to improve their quality are discussed.

Keywords: AGREE II; Clinical practice guidelines; Guidelines development; Guidelines evaluation; Guidelines quality.