Critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for adult cancer patients with febrile neutropenia

Abstract

Abstract Objectives To critically appraise published international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for management of febrile neutropenia in adult patients with cancer and to determine opportunities for improved development and reporting. Methods A literature search identified CPGs for adult cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. Four independent assessors evaluated each included CPG according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. Standardized scores were calculated for each guideline and polled collectively. Reliability of assessment was determined using a two-way random model intraclass correlation coefficients. Key findings Eight CPGs were independently evaluated by four assessors. Collectively, the highest scoring domain was editorial independence (83.3), followed by clarity of presentation (55.4), scope and purpose (53.4), stakeholder involvement (53.1), rigour of development (52.7) and applicability (47.8). Overall assessments ranged from 28.6 to 96.4 of 100 possible points. Three (37.5%) guidelines were recommended for use without alterations, two (25%) guidelines were recommended with alterations, and three (37.5%) guidelines were not recommended for implementation into practice. Reliability varied between guidelines with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.41 to 0.82. Conclusions Clinical practice guidelines for febrile neutropenia in adult patients with cancer were moderately rated with a 37.5% of guidelines being recommended for use in practice. Guideline developers should focus on improving CPG applicability and rigour in the development and reporting processes. Critical appraisal of guidelines should become a standard practice prior to implementation into clinical settings.