TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical practice guidelines on newborn hearing screening
T2 - A systematic quality appraisal using the AGREE II instrument
AU - Chorath, Kevin
AU - Garza, Luis
AU - Tarriela, Aina
AU - Luu, Neil
AU - Rajasekaran, Karthik
AU - Moreira, Alvaro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Introduction: Several guidelines and consensus statements have been produced and disseminated for the detection and management of newborn hearing loss. However, to date, the quality and methodologic rigor of these screening and management protocols have not been appraised. Objective: To identify and evaluate existing guidelines and consensus statements for the detection and management of neonatal hearing loss. Methods: A comprehensive search of EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS and grey literature sources was conducted until August 2020. The quality of these guidelines was assessed by four independent reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition (AGREE II). Domain scores were considered satisfactory quality if they scored >60%, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess agreement among the appraisers. Results: Twelve guidelines were assessed for critical evaluation. Only two guidelines were classified as ‘high quality’, and the remaining were ‘average’ or ‘low quality’. The ‘Scope and Purpose’ domain achieved the highest mean score (91.3% ± 5.8%), and lowest was ‘Rigor of Development’ (35.8% ± 19.1%). ICC analysis showed good to very good agreement across all domains (0.63–0.95). Conclusion: These findings highlight the variability in methodologic quality of guidelines and consensus statement for the detection and management of neonatal hearing loss. These results may help to improve the reporting of future guidelines and guide the selection and use of these guidelines in clinical practice.
AB - Introduction: Several guidelines and consensus statements have been produced and disseminated for the detection and management of newborn hearing loss. However, to date, the quality and methodologic rigor of these screening and management protocols have not been appraised. Objective: To identify and evaluate existing guidelines and consensus statements for the detection and management of neonatal hearing loss. Methods: A comprehensive search of EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS and grey literature sources was conducted until August 2020. The quality of these guidelines was assessed by four independent reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition (AGREE II). Domain scores were considered satisfactory quality if they scored >60%, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess agreement among the appraisers. Results: Twelve guidelines were assessed for critical evaluation. Only two guidelines were classified as ‘high quality’, and the remaining were ‘average’ or ‘low quality’. The ‘Scope and Purpose’ domain achieved the highest mean score (91.3% ± 5.8%), and lowest was ‘Rigor of Development’ (35.8% ± 19.1%). ICC analysis showed good to very good agreement across all domains (0.63–0.95). Conclusion: These findings highlight the variability in methodologic quality of guidelines and consensus statement for the detection and management of neonatal hearing loss. These results may help to improve the reporting of future guidelines and guide the selection and use of these guidelines in clinical practice.
KW - AGREE II
KW - Guideline
KW - Newborn hearing loss
KW - Pediatric hearing loss
KW - Quality
KW - Universal newborn screening
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096517540&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85096517540&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijporl.2020.110504
DO - 10.1016/j.ijporl.2020.110504
M3 - Article
C2 - 33229031
AN - SCOPUS:85096517540
SN - 0165-5876
VL - 141
JO - International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology
JF - International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology
M1 - 110504
ER -