Quality Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Expert Consensus Statements for Knee Osteoarthritis Based on AGREE Ⅱ （2019—2025）
10.13422/j.cnki.syfjx.20261123
- VernacularTitle:基于AGREE Ⅱ的膝骨关节炎临床指南及专家共识质量评价（2019—2025年）
- Author:
Yifan LU
1
;
Zhuo YANG
2
;
Hui XIONG
1
;
Gonghui JIAN
1
;
Xiaolong LU
1
;
Pei CHEN
3
;
Wenjie SU
1
;
Zebing MA
1
;
Tianxiao CHEN
1
;
Simin TANG
2
;
Tao WANG
2
Author Information
1. Hunan University of Chinese Medicine， Changsha 410208，China
2. Changde Affiliated Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine， Changde 415000，China
3. The First Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine， Changsha 410208，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
knee osteoarthritis;
clinical practice guideline;
expert consensus;
Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation Ⅱ （AGREE Ⅱ）;
quality appraisal
- From:
Chinese Journal of Experimental Traditional Medical Formulae
2026;32(23):186-195
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus statements on knee osteoarthritis （KOA） based on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation Ⅱ （AGREE Ⅱ）， thus providing a new perspective for clinical selection as well as guideline development and updating. MethodsA systematic search was conducted for KOA-related guidelines and consensus statements published from November 1， 2019 to December 31， 2025. The databases and platforms searched included CNKI， VIP， Wanfang Data， PubMed， Web of Science， the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence （NICE）， SinoMed， Yimaitong， and relevant official websites. Two researchers independently screened the literature， and four researchers used AGREE Ⅱ to score the included documents and completed the quality appraisal after reaching a unified understanding. Subgroup analyses were further performed according to developing organization， document type， medical approach， funding status， and region of development， and longitudinal comparisons were conducted by year of publication. ResultsA total of 23 guidelines and consensus statements were included. The standardized scores of the six AGREE Ⅱ domains， from the highest to the lowest， were clarity of presentation ［（70.36±8.13）%］， scope and purpose ［（67.46 ± 11.44）%］， editorial independence ［（64.50±20.01）%］， rigor of development ［（62.24±15.26）%］， stakeholder involvement ［（55.73±10.29）%］， and applicability ［（53.89±13.17）%］. In terms of overall recommendation， 6 documents were rated as grade A and 17 as grade B. Stratified analyses showed that professional organizations scored higher than comprehensive organizations. The overall scores of traditional Chinese medicine/integrative medicine and Western medicine guidelines （or consensus statements） were similar. Guidelines scored higher than consensus statements. The overall scores were similar between documents with reported funding and those without reported funding. International guidelines scored higher than domestic guidelines. Longitudinal comparisons showed that the largest number of documents was published in 2021. The overall scores were higher in 2021—2022， and some domain scores declined in 2023—2024. Overall， the quality of recent guidelines and consensus statements for KOA showed slight fluctuations， without a clear linear trend. ConclusionThe included guidelines and consensus statements for KOA can generally serve as references for clinical practice. However， the quality across domains remains uneven， and stakeholder involvement and applicability are still weak domains. Future guideline development and updating should further improve methodological standardization and transparency in reporting.
