Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to systematically assess the methodological quality of current sepsis infection management guidelines and identify gaps in knowledge that limit evidence-based practice. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted to obtain guidelines for the management of sepsis infections (2012-2021), and three reviewers independently assessed the quality of eligible guidelines using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to measure the agreement between reviewers. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to analyze the strength of recommendation and level of evidence of the guideline, and the number of recommendations, strength of recommendation, and level of evidence were determined. RESULTS: Eleven guidelines for the management of sepsis infection were identified. An overall high agreement among the evaluators for each domain was observed (ICC ranged from 0.850 to 0.959). The overall scores of the included guidelines were all over 60% (range, 62.3-89.90%), which were worthy of recommendation for clinical use; among them, 4 guidelines had an overall score of over 80%, which were high-quality guideline articles. In terms of the quality domains of the guidelines, the scope and purpose domain and the clarity of expression domain had the highest average scores, which were 93.6% (range, 79.6-98.1%) and 91.4% (range, 64.8-98.1%), respectively, while the applicability domain had the lowest average score, which was 64.8% (range, 51.4-76.4%). The strength of the recommendations of the guideline recommendations was mainly weak, accounting for 73.4%; the level of evidence cited was mainly very low quality (60.2%) and low quality (28.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of sepsis infection management guidelines varies, but the overall quality level is satisfactory. Improving the low-quality areas of sepsis guidelines, attempting to resolve existing problems and controversies, and improving the quality of research evidence will be effective ways for developers to upgrade sepsis guidelines.