37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Preparing for pandemics: a systematic review of pandemic influenza clinical management guidelines

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of evidence-based clinical decision-making. Clinical management guidelines (CMGs) may help reduce morbidity and mortality by improving the quality of clinical decisions. This systematic review aims to evaluate the availability, inclusivity, and quality of pandemic influenza CMGs, to identify gaps that can be addressed to strengthen pandemic preparedness in this area.

          Methods

          Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, TRIP (Turning Research Into Practice), and Guideline Central were searched systematically from January 2008 to 23rd June 2022, complemented by a grey literature search till 16th June 2022. Pandemic influenza CMGs including supportive care or empirical treatment recommendations were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and assessed their quality using AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation). The findings are presented narratively.

          Results

          Forty-eight CMGs were included. They were produced in high- (42%, 20/48), upper-middle- (40%, 19/48), and lower-middle (8%, 4/48) income countries, or by international organisations (10%, 5/48). Most CMGs (81%, 39/48) were over 5 years old. Guidelines included treatment recommendations for children (75%, 36/48), pregnant women (54%, 26/48), people with immunosuppression (33%, 16/48), and older adults (29%, 14/48). Many CMGs were of low quality (median overall score: 3 out of 7 (range 1–7). All recommended oseltamivir; recommendations for other neuraminidase inhibitors and supportive care were limited and at times contradictory. Only 56% (27/48) and 27% (13/48) addressed oxygen and fluid therapy, respectively.

          Conclusions

          Our data highlights the limited availability of up-to-date pandemic influenza CMGs globally. Of those identified, many were limited in scope and quality and several lacked recommendations for specific at-risk populations. Recommendations on supportive care, the mainstay of treatment, were limited and heterogeneous. The most recent guideline highlighted that the evidence-base to support antiviral treatment recommendations is still limited. There is an urgent need for trials into treatment and supportive care strategies including for different risk populations. New evidence should be incorporated into globally accessible guidelines, to benefit patient outcomes. A ‘living guideline’ framework is recommended and further research into guideline implementation in different resourced settings, particularly low- and middle-income countries.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-022-02616-6.

          Related collections

          Most cited references81

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

            Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                louise.sigfrid@gmail.com
                Journal
                BMC Med
                BMC Med
                BMC Medicine
                BioMed Central (London )
                1741-7015
                7 November 2022
                7 November 2022
                2022
                : 20
                : 425
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.4991.5, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, Pandemic Sciences Institute, , University of Oxford, ; Oxford, OX3 7LG UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.5337.2, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7603, Bristol Medical School, , University of Bristol, ; Bristol, BS8 1TL UK
                [3 ]GRID grid.410556.3, ISNI 0000 0001 0440 1440, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, ; Oxford, OX3 9DU UK
                [4 ]GRID grid.4991.5, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, Nuffield Department of Medicine, , University of Oxford, ; Oxford, OX3 7BN UK
                [5 ]GRID grid.4991.5, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, Bodleian Health Care Libraries, , University of Oxford, ; Oxford, OX3 9DU UK
                [6 ]GRID grid.5335.0, ISNI 0000000121885934, Department of Veterinary Medicine, , University of Cambridge, ; Cambridge, CB2 1TN UK
                [7 ]Imperial University, London, SW7 2BX UK
                [8 ]GRID grid.52788.30, ISNI 0000 0004 0427 7672, Wellcome Trust, ; London, NW1 2BE UK
                [9 ]GRID grid.48004.38, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9764, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, ; Liverpool, L3 5QA UK
                [10 ]GRID grid.416657.7, ISNI 0000 0004 0630 4574, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, ; Johannesburg, South Africa
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9236-7317
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3659-7788
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6162-4146
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4982-6690
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6508-0994
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-9214
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4635-8959
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5458-7124
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8071-0763
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5594-9526
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8606-7932
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2425-9394
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2828-7678
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9822-1586
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2764-1177
                Article
                2616
                10.1186/s12916-022-02616-6
                9640791
                36345005
                06cd8d92-564d-43b4-9bf6-be069563493f
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 10 January 2022
                : 19 October 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Wellcome Trust
                Award ID: [215091/Z/18/Z]
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
                Award ID: [OPP1209135]
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: EU FP7 project PREPARE
                Award ID: (602525)
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Medicine
                pandemic,preparedness,influenza,clinical management guidelines,agree ii,supportive care
                Medicine
                pandemic, preparedness, influenza, clinical management guidelines, agree ii, supportive care

                Comments

                Comment on this article