Status Quo and Analysis of the Cardiovascular Clinical Practice Guidelines/Expert Consensuses of Chinese and Integrative Medicine: A Systematic Review.
10.1007/s11655-020-2725-3
- Author:
Cheng-Yu LI
1
;
Yao-Long CHEN
1
;
Jia-Yuan HU
1
;
Min LI
1
;
Xiao-Yu ZHANG
1
;
Yang SUN
1
;
Rui ZHENG
1
;
Shi-Qi CHEN
1
;
Song-Jie HAN
1
;
Tian-Mai HE
1
;
Hong-Cai SHANG
2
Author Information
1. Key Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education and Beijing, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China.
2. Key Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education and Beijing, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China. shanghongcai@126.com.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Chinese medicine;
cardiovascular disease;
clinical practice guideline;
integrated medicine;
systematic review
- From:
Chinese journal of integrative medicine
2021;27(1):54-61
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To describe and analyze the status quo of cardiovascular clinical practice guidelines or expert consensuses including both Chinese medicine (CM) and integrative medicine, through systematic literatures searching and quality assessment.
METHODS:Data bases including Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal Database were searched for published CM or integrative cardiovascular clinical practice guidelines or expert consensuses. The website www. medlive.cn was also retrieved as supplementary. The clinical practice evaluation tool AGREE II was used to assess the quality of included guidelines or consensuses.
RESULTS:A total of 31 relevant clinical practice guidelines or expert consensuses were included, covering diagnosis, treatment, Chinese patent and patient fields. Common cardiovascular diseases like coronary heart diseases, heart failure and arrhythmia were also involved. Through analysis it was found that both the quantity and quality of included guidelines have been improved year by year. A total of 4 evidence-based clinical practice guideline has been found, one of which was a guideline project plan. Except that, the remaining 27 reports were all consensus-based guidelines. The scores of each field, from highest to lowest, were clarity of presentation (58%), scope and purpose (54%), stakeholder involvement (28%), rigor of development (21%), applicability (13%) and editorial independence (8%).
CONCLUSIONS:Although clinical practice guidelines in cardiovascular domain of Chinese have gained increasing concern, with both quantity and quality improved, there is still huge gap in methodology and reporting standards between CM guidelines and international ones. On the one hand, it is essential to improve and standardize the methodology of developing CM guidelines. On the other hands, the evaluation system of evidence and recommendation with CM characters should be developed urgently.
