Reporting form and content of research priorities identified in knee osteoarthritis clinical practice guidelines: a methodological literature analysis

Abstract

ObjectivesClinical practice guideline (CPG) developers conduct systematic summaries of research evidence, providing them great capacity and ability to identify research priorities. We systematically analysed the reporting form and content of research priorities in CPGs related to knee osteoarthritis (KOA) to provide a valuable reference for guideline developers and clinicians.DesignA methodological literature analysis was done and the characteristics of the reporting form and the content of the research priorities identified in KOA CPGs were summarised.Data sourcesSix databases (PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, Wanfang and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database) were searched for CPGs published from 1 January 2017 to 4 December 2022. The official websites of 40 authoritative orthopaedic societies, rheumatology societies and guideline development organisations were additionally searched.Eligibility criteriaWe included all KOA CPGs published in English or Chinese from 1 January 2017 that included at least one recommendation for KOA. We excluded duplicate publications, older versions of CPGs as well as guidance documents for guideline development.Data extraction and synthesisReviewers worked in pairs and independently screened and extracted the data. Descriptive statistics were used, and absolute frequencies and proportions of related items were calculated.Results187 research priorities reported in 41 KOA CPGs were identified. 24 CPGs reported research priorities, of which 17 (41.5%) presented overall research priorities for the entire guideline rather than for specific recommendations. 110 (58.8%) research priorities were put forward due to lack of evidence. Meanwhile, more than 70% of the research priorities reflected the P (population) and I (intervention) structural elements, with 135 (72.2%) and 146 (78.1%), respectively. More than half of the research priorities (118, 63.8%) revolved around evaluating the efficacy of interventions. Research priorities primarily focused on physical activity (32, 17.3%), physical therapy (30, 16.2%), surgical therapy (27, 14.6%) and pharmacological treatment (26, 14.1%).ConclusionsResearch priorities reported in KOA CPGs mainly focused on evaluating non-pharmacological interventions. There exists considerable room for improvement for a comprehensive and standardised generation and reporting of research priorities in KOA CPGs.