Evidenzbasierte Leitlinienentwicklung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurologie (DGN) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurorehabilitation (DGNR) - Methodik für die systematische Evidenzbasierung

Zusammenfassung

Evidenzbasierte Leitlinien, die entweder von einer Fachgesellschaft (S2e-Leitlinien) oder fachgesellschaftsübergreifend (S3-Leitlinien) erstellt werden, verbinden mit hoher Entwicklungsqualität die derzeit beste verfügbare externe Evidenz (Studienlage) mit daraus abgeleiteten Empfehlungen für die klinische Praxis. Bei einer fachgesellschaftsübergreifenden Entwicklung werden die Empfehlungen zudem in einem strukturierten Konsensusverfahren formal konsentiert. Sie generieren damit für Kliniker eine hohe Sicherheit, bei ihren Entscheidungen den Stand der Wissenschaft adäquat zu berücksichtigen. Basierend auf der Leitlinienentwicklungsmethodik der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für wissenschaftliche medizinische Fachgesellschaften (AWMF), haben sich die DGN und DGNR auf Standards der Umsetzung der Leitlinienentwicklungsmethodik für die Evidenzbasierung ihrer Leitlinien verständigt, die hier dokumentiert werden. Dem Leser und Nutzer von evidenzbasierten Leitlinien machen sie verständlich, welche inhaltlich-methodischen Aspekte zu berücksichtigen sind, wenn aus der Datenlage aus klinischen Studien Praxisempfehlungen abgeleitet werden sollen.

Abstract

Evidence-based guidelines of high quality, which are prepared either by a scientific medical association (S2e guidelines) or by an interdisciplinary group of different medical associations (S3 guidelines), represent a combination of the best available external evidence (from clinical trials) and the recommendations derived from it for clinical practice. In the case of an interdisciplinary development, the recommendations are also formally agreed upon in a structured consensus process. They thus generate a high degree of certainty for clinicians that the state of the art is adequately taken into account in their decisions. Based on the guideline development methodology of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF), the DGN and DGNR have agreed on standards for the implementation of the guideline development methodology for the evidence-based development of their guidelines, which are documented here. They make it clear to readers and users of evidence-based guidelines which content-related and methodological aspects have to be taken into account if practice recommendations are to be derived from and based on data available from clinical studies.

Schlüsselwörter

Leitlinie - Evidenz - kritische Würdigung - Empfehlung

Keywords

Guideline - evidence - critical appraisal - recommendation

Publication History

Article published online:
23 February 2021

• Literatur

• 1 Muche-Borowski C, Selbmann HK, Müller W. et al. Das AWMF-Regelwerk Leitlinien. 1. Aufl.. 2012. AWMF; http://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/awmf-regelwerk
• 2 Brouwers M, Kho ME, Browman GP. et al. Makarski J on behalf of the AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE II: Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in healthcare. Can Med Assoc J 2010; 182: E839-842 Deutsche Version erhältlich unter: https://www.agreetrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AGREE_II_German-Version.pdf
• 3 Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J. et al. The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club 1995; 123: A12-13
• 4 WHO. The ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001
• 5 Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group 2013; GRADE Handbook – Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Updated October 2013. Hamilton, (retrieved on 31.03.20 from https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html)
• 6 GRADEpro GDT: GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool [Software]. McMaster University, 2020; (developed by Evidence Prime, Inc.) Available from gradepro.org
• 7 OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group . (2011); “The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence” Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o = 5653
• 8 Higgins JPT, Savovíc J, Page M. et al. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. In: JPT H, Thomas J. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 2nd ed.. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons; 2019: 205-228
• 9 Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G. et al. Amstar 2: A critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed) 2017; 358: j4008
• 10 Zhang Y, Alonso-Coello P, Guyatt GH. et al. GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol 2019; 111: 94-104
• 11 Zhang Y, Coello PA, Guyatt GH. et al. GRADE guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-inconsistency, imprecision, and other domains. J Clin Epidemiol 2019; 111: 83-93
• 12 Schünemann HJ, Higgins JPT, Vist GE. et al. Guyatt GH on behalf of the Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group and the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. Chapter 14: Completing ‘Summary of findings’ tables and grading the confidence in or quality of the evidence. JPT H, Thomas J. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 2nd ed. 2019. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons; 375-402
• 13 Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD. et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: The significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; a 66 (07) 719-725
• 14 Guyatt G, Vist G, Falck-Ytter Y. et al. An emerging consensus on grading recommendations?. ACP J Club 2006; 144: A8-9
• 15 Andrews JC, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD. et al. GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; b; 66(7) [phone]
• 16 Zhang Y, Coello PA, Brożek J. et al. Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2017; 15: 52