Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Quantity and quality of complementary and alternative medicine recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review.
Ng, Jeremy Y; Verma, Kiran D; Gilotra, Kevin.
Afiliación
  • Ng JY; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: ngjy2@mcmaster.ca.
  • Verma KD; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: vermak10@mcmaster.ca.
  • Gilotra K; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: gilotrak@mcmaster.ca.
Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis ; 31(11): 3004-3015, 2021 10 28.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34627698
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

Approximately 70% of Americans with diabetes have used complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the past year. Healthcare providers often receive minimal training on these therapies and subsequently rely on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to supplement their knowledge about the safe and effective use of CAM for the treatment/management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The purpose of this systematic review is to determine the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in CPGs for the treatment and/or management of T2DM. DATA

SYNTHESIS:

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched from 2009 to 2020, in addition to the Guidelines International Network and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health websites. CPGs containing treatment and/or management recommendations for T2DM were eligible; those with CAM recommendations were quality-assessed with the AGREE II instrument twice, once for the overall CPG and once for the CAM sections. Twenty-seven CPGs were deemed eligible, of which 7 made CAM recommendations. Mean scaled domain percentages were (overall, CAM) scope and purpose (89.7%, 79.8%), clarity of presentation (85.7%, 48.4%), stakeholder involvement (67.9%, 28.2%), applicability (54.8%, 20.2%), rigour of development (49.7%, 35.7%), and editorial independence (44.1%, 44.1%).

CONCLUSIONS:

Quality varied within and across CPGs; domain scores across CAM sections generally scored lower than the overall CPG. Given that CAM therapies for T2DM are only represented in one-quarter of eligible CPGs and are of lower quality, a knowledge gap exists for healthcare providers who seek evidence-based information on this topic in order to effectively counsel inquiring patients.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud / Terapias Complementarias / Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto / Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud / Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA / CARDIOLOGIA / CIENCIAS DA NUTRICAO / METABOLISMO Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud / Terapias Complementarias / Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto / Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud / Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA / CARDIOLOGIA / CIENCIAS DA NUTRICAO / METABOLISMO Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article