Quality assessment of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of pregnant women with sickle cell disease using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The management of pregnant women with sickle cell disease (SCD) poses a major challenge for maternal healthcare services owing to the potential for complications associated with morbidity and mortality. Trustworthy evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have a major impact on the positive outcomes of appropriate healthcare. The objective of this study was to critically appraise the quality of recent CPGs for SCD in pregnant women. METHODS: Clinical questions were identified and the relevant CPG and bibliographic databases were searched and screened for eligible CPGs. Each CPG was appraised by four independent appraisers using the AGREE II Instrument. Inter-rater analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Four eligible CPGs were appraised: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Among them, the overall assessments of three CPGs (NICE, RCOG, NHLBI) scored greater than 70%; 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 (90%, 73%, 71%), domain [5] (90%, 46%, 47%), and domain [6] (71%, 77%, 52%) for NICE, RCOG, and NHLBI, respectively. Overall, the clinical recommendations were not significantly different between the included CPGs. CONCLUSIONS: Three evidence-based CPGs presented superior methodological quality. NICE demonstrated the highest quality followed by RCOG and NHLBI and all three CPGs were recommended for use in practice.

Prevalence of bleeding symptoms among young adults in Saudi Arabia, a national survey.

ABSTRACT: Prevalence of bleeding disorders vary due to several factors including geographical location. Mild bleeding disorders can lead to iron deficiency, morbidity, and in severe cases mortality. Quantification of haemorrhagic symptoms is a key component in management of bleeding disorders and a challenging task for clinicians.An abridged version of MCMDM-1vWD questionnaire with validated Arabic translation was used to quantify bleeding disorders in adult students (n = 1138) in 4 different regions of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Statistical analysis was performed to indicate gender disparity and prevalence.74.5% of respondents answered at least 1 question with affirmation, with 32.3% affected in Riyadh showing the highest prevalence and 14.03% affected in Dammam showing the least prevalence (P-value < .001). Gender-wise, higher prevalence of bleeding disorders in females 54.9% than in males 45.1% was observed (P-value .01). Epistaxis prevalence was significantly higher in males 30.7% vs 23.2% in females (P-value .0004), while cutaneous symptoms were reported significantly more by female participants 29.7% vs 12.3% in males (P-value < .001). Menorrhagia was reported by 28% of females, with heavy bleeding experienced by 57.6% female participants for <7 days while in 42.4% of females for >7 days.The current study signifies the ethnic distribution and gender disparity of mild bleeding disorders, and highlights the need for national surveillance system in order to improve management of patients with bleeding disorders.