Complementary and alternative medicine mention and recommendations in guidelines for anxiety: A systematic review and quality assessment
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND: Up to 43% of patients with anxiety disorders (ADS) use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), however, many healthcare providers receive little training on this topic. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are relied upon to guide decision-making, especially with respect to topics less familiar to healthcare providers. In the present study, we identified the quantity and assessed the quality of CAM recommendations in CPGs for the treatment and/or management of ADS. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched from 2009 to April 2020 to identify eligible CPGs. In addition, the Guidelines International Network and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health websites were also searched. Eligible CPGs containing CAM recommendations were evaluated using AGREE II. RESULTS: Eleven CPGs were eligible, of which six made CAM recommendations. Average scaled domain percentages for these six CPGs from highest to lowest were as follows (% overall, % CAM): clarity and presentation (83.3%, 73.6%); scope and purpose (77.8%, 76.4%); editorial independence (69.4%, 36.8%); stakeholder involvement (55.6%, 31.9%); rigour of development (53.1%, 46.9%); and applicability (43.8%, 29.2%). CONCLUSIONS: A need exists to improve the quality of CAM recommendations in anxiety CPGs through insight from AGREE II and other CPG development resources.
