The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Raising the quality of rheumatology management recommendations: lessons from the EULAR process 10 years after provision

Raising the quality of rheumatology management recommendations: lessons from the EULAR process 10 years after provision
Raising the quality of rheumatology management recommendations: lessons from the EULAR process 10 years after provision
Objective. To increase understanding of how to raise the quality of rheumatology guidelines by reviewing European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) management recommendations, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, 10 years after publication of the EULAR standardized operating procedures (SOP) for the production of recommendations. It was hoped that this work could help inform improvements in guideline development by other societies and organizations.

Methods. The SOP were published in 2004 to ensure the quality of EULAR-endorsed recommendations. We reviewed 27 published EULAR recommendations for management using the AGREE II tool. This provides a framework to assess the quality of guidelines across six broad domains using 23 specific questions.

Results. Overall the EULAR recommendations reviewed have been performed to a high standard. There are particular strengths in the methodology and presentation of the guidelines; however, the results indicate areas for development in future recommendations: in particular, stakeholder involvement and applicability of the recommendations. Improvements in quality were evident in recent years, with patient representation in 9 of 15 (60.0%) recommendations published 2010–14 compared with 4 of 12 (33.3%) published 2000–09.

Conclusion. In the last 10 years the overall quality of recommendations was good, with standards improving over the decade following publication of the SOP. However, this review process has identified potential areas for improvement, especially in patient representation and provision of implementation tools. The lessons from this work can be applied to the development of rheumatology guidelines by other societies and organizations.
clinical practice guideline, health care quality assessment, rheumatology
1462-0324
1-5
Colebatch-Bourn, A.N.
b5893ecd-076b-41b9-9929-1782f4d2c121
Conagham, P.G.
cf0028df-dc47-4533-82bb-6047792a50a3
Arden, N.K.
23af958d-835c-4d79-be54-4bbe4c68077f
Cooper, C.
e05f5612-b493-4273-9b71-9e0ce32bdad6
Dougados, M.
5934dae5-3412-4fb4-a8cb-aa946eebdf13
Edwards, C.J.
dcb27fec-75ea-4575-a844-3588bcf14106
Colebatch-Bourn, A.N.
b5893ecd-076b-41b9-9929-1782f4d2c121
Conagham, P.G.
cf0028df-dc47-4533-82bb-6047792a50a3
Arden, N.K.
23af958d-835c-4d79-be54-4bbe4c68077f
Cooper, C.
e05f5612-b493-4273-9b71-9e0ce32bdad6
Dougados, M.
5934dae5-3412-4fb4-a8cb-aa946eebdf13
Edwards, C.J.
dcb27fec-75ea-4575-a844-3588bcf14106

Colebatch-Bourn, A.N., Conagham, P.G., Arden, N.K., Cooper, C., Dougados, M. and Edwards, C.J. (2015) Raising the quality of rheumatology management recommendations: lessons from the EULAR process 10 years after provision. Rheumatology, 1-5. (doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keu525). (PMID:25701558)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objective. To increase understanding of how to raise the quality of rheumatology guidelines by reviewing European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) management recommendations, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, 10 years after publication of the EULAR standardized operating procedures (SOP) for the production of recommendations. It was hoped that this work could help inform improvements in guideline development by other societies and organizations.

Methods. The SOP were published in 2004 to ensure the quality of EULAR-endorsed recommendations. We reviewed 27 published EULAR recommendations for management using the AGREE II tool. This provides a framework to assess the quality of guidelines across six broad domains using 23 specific questions.

Results. Overall the EULAR recommendations reviewed have been performed to a high standard. There are particular strengths in the methodology and presentation of the guidelines; however, the results indicate areas for development in future recommendations: in particular, stakeholder involvement and applicability of the recommendations. Improvements in quality were evident in recent years, with patient representation in 9 of 15 (60.0%) recommendations published 2010–14 compared with 4 of 12 (33.3%) published 2000–09.

Conclusion. In the last 10 years the overall quality of recommendations was good, with standards improving over the decade following publication of the SOP. However, this review process has identified potential areas for improvement, especially in patient representation and provision of implementation tools. The lessons from this work can be applied to the development of rheumatology guidelines by other societies and organizations.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 19 February 2015
Keywords: clinical practice guideline, health care quality assessment, rheumatology
Organisations: Human Development & Health

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 375812
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/375812
ISSN: 1462-0324
PURE UUID: 77b4f264-cc76-4119-af8e-ada272b8f4a9
ORCID for C. Cooper: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-3510-0709

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 15 Apr 2015 15:08
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 02:45

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: A.N. Colebatch-Bourn
Author: P.G. Conagham
Author: N.K. Arden
Author: C. Cooper ORCID iD
Author: M. Dougados
Author: C.J. Edwards

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×