RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is a large gap between the needs of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and the currently available services in Saudi Arabia. Services are often difficult to access, inconsistent in quality, incomplete, unsatisfactory, and costly. As such, there is a national need for expert consensus on the appropriate standards for the assessment and management of children on the autism spectrum. METHODOLOGY: A guideline development group (GDC) was formed by professionals representing all related specialties and institutions involved in the management of individuals on the autism spectrum in Saudi Arabia. They met on a regular basis over 21 months. The guideline development process consisted of five steps starting from reviewing existing guidelines and ending with discussing and writing this manuscript. A formal voting process was utilized and recommendations were discussed until a consensus was reached. RESULTS: There was consensus on the following: A specialized diagnostic assessment needs to be carried out by an experienced multidisciplinary team for children referred to assess for ASD. They should be assessed for medical etiology, their behavioral history carefully reviewed, and symptoms directly observed. Longitudinal assessments are encouraged to reflect the effects of symptoms on the individual's ability to function while with their family, among peers, and in school settings. An additional formal assessment of language, cognitive, and adaptive abilities as well as sensory status is essential to complete the diagnostic process. Interventions should be individualized, developmentally appropriate, and intensive, with performance data relevant to intervention goals to evaluate and adjust interventions. Target symptoms must be identified to address and develop monitoring systems to track change. CONCLUSION: ASD is a complex condition with widely varying clinical manifestations, thus requiring evaluation and intervention by a range of professionals working in coordination. Behavioral and environmental interventions are the key to optimal outcomes, in conjunction with medications when indicated for specific symptoms. Parental involvement in interventions is vital to sustaining therapeutic gains.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a multifaceted neurodevelopmental disorder requiring multimodal intervention and an army of multidisciplinary teams for a proper rehabilitation plan. Accordingly, multiple practice guidelines have been published for different disciplines. However, systematic evidence to detect and intervene must be updated regularly. Our main objective is to compare and summarize the recommendations made in the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for ASD in children released from November 2015 to March 2022. METHODS: CPGs were subjected to a systematic review. We developed the inclusion and exclusion criteria and health-related questions, then searched and screened for CPGs utilizing bibliographic and CPG databases. Each of the CPGs used in the study were critically evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. In a realistic comparison table, we summarized the recommendations. RESULTS: Four eligible CPGs were appraised: Australian Autism CRC (ACRC); Ministry of Health New Zealand (NZ); National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, Healthcare Improvement Scotland (SIGN-HIS). The overall assessments of all four CPGs scored greater than 80%; these findings were consistent with the high scores in the six domains of AGREE II, including: (1) scope and purpose, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence domains. Domain (3) scored 84%, 93%, 86%, and 85%; domain (5) 92%, 89%, 54%, and 85%; and domain (6) 92%, 96%, 88%, and 92% for ACRC, NICE, NZ, and SIGN-HIS, respectively. Overall, there were no serious conflicts between the clinical recommendations of the four CPGs, but some were more comprehensive and elaborative than others. CONCLUSIONS: All four assessed evidence-based CPGs demonstrated high methodological quality and relevance for use in practice.
