학술논문
Methodology for the adolopment of recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Document Type
Article
Author
Khabsa, Joanne; Yaacoub, Sally; Omair, Mohammed A.; Al Rayes, Hanan; Akl, Elie A.; the KSA 2021 ACR RA adolopment working group; Abdulaziz, Sultana; Al Janobi, Ghada A.; Al Khalaf, Abdulaziz; Al Mehmadi, Bader; Al Nassar, Mahasin; AlBalawi, Faisal; AlFurayj, Abdullah S.; Al-Jedai, Ahmed Hamdan; Almalag, Haya Mohammed; Almudaiheem, Hajer Yousef; AlRehaily, Ali; Attar, Mohammed A.; Kibbi, Lina El; Fraenkel, Liana
Source
Subject
*RHEUMATOID arthritis
*RHEUMATOLOGY
*
Language
ISSN
1471-2288
Abstract
Background: Currently, there are no guidelines for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) tailored to the context of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Adaptation of guidelines accounts for contextual factors and becomes more efficient than de novo guideline development when relevant, good quality, and up-to-date guidelines are available. The objective of this study is to describe the methodology used for the adolopment of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines for the treatment of RA in the KSA. Methods: We followed the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT methodology. The adolopment KSA panel included relevant stakeholders and leading contributors to the original guidelines. We developed a list of five adaptation-relevant prioritization criteria that the panelists applied to the original recommendations. We updated the original evidence profiles with newly published studies identified by the panelists. We constructed Evidence to Decision (EtD) tables including contextual information from the KSA setting. We used the PanelVoice function of GRADEPro Guideline Development Tool (GDT) to obtain the panel's judgments on the EtD criteria ahead of the panel meeting. Following the meeting, we used the PANELVIEW instrument to obtain the panel's evaluation of the process. Results: The KSA panel prioritized five recommendations, for which one evidence profile required updating. Out of five adoloped recommendations, two were modified in terms of direction, and one was modified in terms of certainty of the evidence. Criteria driving the modifications in direction were valuation of outcomes, balance of effects, cost, and acceptability. The mean score on the 7-point scale items of the PANELVIEW instrument had an average of 6.47 (SD = 0.18) across all items. Conclusion: The GRADE-ADOLOPMENT methodology proved to be efficient. The panel assessed the process and outcome positively. Engagement of stakeholders proved to be important for the success of this project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]