Guidelines for the symptomatic management of fever in children: systematic review of the literature and quality appraisal with AGREE II. Issue 7 (31st July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chiappini, Elena; Bortone, Barbara; Galli, Luisa; Martino, Maurizio de
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 7:Issue 7(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-07-31
• Subjects: Children -- guidelines -- antipyretics -- fever; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015404
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Several societies have produced and disseminated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the symptomatic management of fever in children. However, to date, the quality of such guidelines has not been appraised. Objective: To identify and evaluate guidelines for the symptomatic management of fever in children. Methods: The research was conducted using PubMed, guideline websites, and Google (January 2010 to July 2016). The quality of the CPGs was independently assessed by two assessors using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument, and specific recommendations in guidelines were summarised and evaluated. Domain scores were considered of sufficient quality when >60% and of good quality when >80%. Results: Seven guidelines were retrieved. The median score for the scope and purpose domain was 85.3% (range 66.6–100%). The median score for the stakeholder involvement domain was 57.5% (range 33.3–83.3%) and four guidelines scored >60%. The median score for the rigour of development domain was 52.0% (range 14.6–98.9%), and only three guidelines scored >60%. The median score for the clarity of presentation domain was 80.9% (range 50.0–94.4%). The median score for the applicability domain was 39.3% (8.3–100%). Only one guideline scored >60%. The median score for the editorial independence domain was 48.84% (0–91.6%); only three guidelines scored >60%. Conclusion: Most guidelines were recommended for use even if with modification, especially in the methodology, the applicability and the editorial independence domains. Our results could help improve reporting of future guidelines, and affect the selection and use of guidelines in clinical practice.