Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of perioperative hypothermia: Systematic review, critical appraisal, and quality assessment with the AGREE II instrument

• Published in: Annals of medicine and surgery Vol. 79; p. 103887
• Main Authors: Babiker Mohamed, Mohamed Ali, Abdelwahab Abdelkarim, Wael Ahmed, Salih Aabdeen, Mohamed Abdulmonem, Elobid Ahmed, Tarig Hassan, Sarsour, Hassan H.H., El-Malky, Ahmed M., Amer, Yasser S., alsaleh, Nuha, Nazer, Rakan I.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.07.2022; Elsevier
• Subjects: AGREE II instrument; Critical appraisal; Perioperative hypothermia; Practice guidelines; Quality assessment; Systematic Review / Meta-analysis; Critical appraisal; Practice guidelines; AGREE II instrument; Quality assessment; Perioperative hypothermia
• ISSN: 2049-0801; 2049-0801
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103887

Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is considered an emergency life-threatening situation. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on how to manage hypothermia, based on evidence and expert opinions, could save lives. This systematic review assessed and compared the most recently approved international CPGs with the AGREE II instrument. We searched international bibliographic databases to identify relevant guidelines for managing perioperative hypothermia. Four independent reviewers (consultant anesthesiologists) critically appraised the selected guidelines with the AGREE II instrument. We analyzed inter-rater agreement and calculated an intra-class correlation coefficient (Kappa). We identified five CPGs for perioperative hypothermia that were eligible for critical appraisal. These CPGs were issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE-2016); the American Society of Peri-Anesthesia Nurses/Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (ASPAN/AHRQ-2006); the University of Southern Mississippi (USM/CPG-2017); The University Assistance Complex of Salamanca (UACS/CPG-2018); and the Justus-Liebig University of Giessen (UKGM/CPG-2015). The overall assessments of NICE-2016 and ASPAN/AHRQ-2006 scored >80%. These results were consistent with high scores achieved in the six domains of AGREE II: (1) scope and purpose, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence domains. The NICE-2016, ASPAN/AHRQ-2006, and USM/CPG-2017) scored, respectively, 94%, 81%, and 70% for domain 3, 91%, 87%, and 66% for domain 5, and 90%, 82%, and 77% for domain 6. Generally, the NICE CPGs received significantly better clinical recommendations. However, all five evidence-based CPGs were of high methodological quality and were recommended for use in practice. Saudi Arabia should formulate its own national CPGs for diagnosis and management of perioperative hypothermia and to be published on NICE. •Guidance for adapting CPGs to a given clinical practice is a realistic, practical alternative to de novo CPG development, which is a time-consuming and resource-intensive approach.•Some nations, particularly those with low- and middle-income economies, have chosen to employ CPG adaptation, rather than developing new evidence-based practice programs.•Several formal adaptation approaches are currently available, and they may be tailored further to suit particular circumstances. Evaluations like the one described in the present study should provide guidance for appropriate CPG adaptation or development efforts, particularly for organizations with little expertise with the AGREE II instrument.•The current critical appraisal emphasized the importance of clinicians performing quality assessments of CPGs to ensure transparency and strength in the CPG development process, in accordance with international CPG standards. Moreover, our findings will support the provision of best practices for POH. Based on our findings, we propose that anesthesiologists should include an AGREE II review of CPGs in their capacity development strategies.