Why the study?
The characteristics and reliability of clinical practice guidelines for diagnosing and managing common congenital heart diseases had not been summarized.
Most clinical practice guidelines for common congenital heart diseases lack systematic reviews and fail to meet acceptable quality standards based on the AGREE-II tool.
Current CPGs for congenital heart diseases warrant cautious use; challenges their methodological quality and extends calls for rigorous development standards.
Objective. To summarize the characteristics and reliability of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for diagnosing and managing common congenital heart diseases (CHD). Methods. We conducted a scoping review of CPG for CHD (ventricular septal defects, atrial septal defects, patent ductus arteriosus, and coarctation of aorta) published or updated from 2018 to April 2023. We searched in general search engines, CPG repositories, and webpages of organizations that elaborate CPG. To assess the reliability of CPG, we used the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) tool, with a score ≥70% considered acceptable quality. Results. Twenty-one CPG were identified. Only 6 (28.6%) conducted systematic reviews, and none achieved an acceptable AGREE-II score. “Scope and purpose” had the highest scores, while “stakeholder involvement” had the lowest. Conclusions. Most CPG for CHD lack systematic reviews and do not meet acceptable quality standards, underscoring the need for evidence-based guidelines to guide diagnosis and management effectively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rivera‐Torrejón et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: