Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Erectile dysfunction management: a critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines with the AGREE II instrument

Abstract

Our study aimed to assess the methodological strengths and weaknesses of erectile dysfunction clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for individuals using the AGREE II tool. Erectile dysfunction related CPGs were identified from three databases: the National Guideline Clearinghouse, the Guidelines International Network, and PubMed between 2000 and 2020. We designed an independent assessment for each of the erectile dysfunction related CPGs using the AGREE II tool. Four appraisers performed these assessments. The literature search identified 8 CPGs that met our inclusion criteria. The evaluation of the AGREE II domains of each individual revealed that the median scores of domains related to applicability were quite low (39%). Also, the median scores of domains related to the rigour of development and the stakeholder involvement were relatively low (53% and 63%). We determined the highest median scores in three AGREE II domains: clarity of presentation (80.5%), editorial independence (77%), and scope and purpose (89.5%). We found that the European Association of Urology (EAU), the American Urological Association (AUA), and the British Society for Sexual Medicine (BSSM) guidelines had >60% in >4 domains and that their average AGREE II scores were over 70%. In the Canadian Diabetic Association (CDA) and the Japanese Society for Sexual Medicine (JSSM) guidelines, we found that >4 domains were >60%, but their average AGREE II scores were below 70%. The British Medical Journal (BMJ), the Canadian Urologic Association (CUA), and the Malaysian Urologic Association (MUA) guidelines had >60% in <3 domains. We highly recommended EAU, AUA and BSSM guidelines, while we moderately recommended CDA and JSSM guidelines. BMJ, CUA and MUA guidelines were weakly recommended. The quality of the guidelines for erectile dysfunction was variable according to AGREE II. We noted significant deficiencies in the methodological quality of the CPGs developed by different organisations in the areas of applicability and rigour of development.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E. Institute of Medicine Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice G. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US) Copyright 2011 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.; 2011.

  2. Field MJ, Lohr KN. Institute of Medicine Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice G. Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Program. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US) Copyright (c) National Academy of Sciences; 1990.

  3. Vlayen J, Aertgeerts B, Hannes K, Sermeus W, Ramaekers D. A systematic review of appraisal tools for clinical practice guidelines: multiple similarities and one common deficit. Int J Qual Health Care. 2005;17:235–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. Can Med Assoc J. 2010;182:E839–E42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Eady EA, Layton AM, Sprakel J, Arents BWM, Fedorowicz Z, van Zuuren EJ. AGREE II assessments of recent acne treatment guidelines: how well do they reveal trustworthiness as defined by the U.S. Institute of Medicine criteria? Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:1716–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sabharwal S, Patel NK, Gauher S, Holloway I, Athanasiou T. High methodologic quality but poor applicability: assessment of the AAOS guidelines using the AGREE II instrument. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:1982–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yaman ME, Gudeloglu A, Senturk S, Yaman ND, Tolunay T, Ozturk Y, et al. A critical appraisal of the North American Spine Society guidelines with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. Spine J 2015;15:777–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gupta M, McCauley J, Farkas A, Gudeloglu A, Neuberger MM, Ho YY, et al. Clinical practice guidelines on prostate cancer: a critical appraisal. J Urol. 2015;193:1153–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brosseau L, Rahman P, Poitras S, Toupin-April K, Paterson G, Smith C, et al. A systematic critical appraisal of non-pharmacological management of rheumatoid arthritis with Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e95369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Armstrong JJ, Goldfarb AM, Instrum RS, MacDermid JC. Improvement evident but still necessary in clinical practice guideline quality: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;81:13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Duda S, Fahim C, Szatmari P, Bennett K. Is the national guideline clearinghouse a trustworthy source of practice guidelines for child and youth anxiety and depression? J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2017;26:86–97.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E, Bolla M, Bourke L, Cornford P, et al. EAU - ESTRO - ESUR - SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. European Association of Urology; 2018.

  13. Davis R, Jones JS, Barocas DA, Castle EP, Lang EK, Leveillee RJ, et al. Diagnosis, Evaluation and Follow-up of Asymptomatic Microhematuria (AMH) in adults: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2012;188:2473–81.

  14. Yan J, Min J, Zhou B. Diagnosis of pheochromocytoma: a clinical practice guideline appraisal using AGREE II instrument. J Eval Clin Pract. 2013;19:626–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. The AGREE Reporting Checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ. 2016;354:i4852.

  16. Hackett G, Kirby M, Wylie K, Heald A, Ossei-Gerning N, Edwards D, et al. British society for sexual medicine guidelines on the management of erectile dysfunction in men-2017. J Sex Med. 2018;15:430–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. European Association of Urology. European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2020 Edition. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology Guidelines Office; 2020. p. 800–1032.

  18. Burnett AL, Nehra A, Breau RH, Culkin DJ, Faraday MM, Hakim LS, et al. Erectile dysfunction: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2018;200:633–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Malaysia Urological Association. Clinical Practice Guide in Erectile Dysfunction [2000]. (Erectile Dysfunction). 2000.

  20. Brock G, Harper W. Erectile dysfunction. Can J Diabetes. 2013;37:S150–S2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kimoto Y, Nagao K, Sasaki H, Marumo K, Takahashi Y, Nishi S, et al. JSSM Guidelines for erectile dysfunction. Int J Urol. 2008;15:564–76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Edward D, Kim M. Erectile dysfunction. British Medical Journal; 2018.

  23. Bella AJ, Lee JC, Carrier S, Bénard F, Brock GB. 2015 CUA Practice guidelines for erectile dysfunction. Can Urol Assoc J 2015;9:23–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Booth G, Cheng AYY. Methods. Can J Diabetes. 2013;37:S4–S7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Sola I, Gich I, Delgado-Noguera M, Rigau D, et al. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:e58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Don-Wauchope AC, Sievenpiper JL, Hill SA, Iorio A. Applicability of the AGREE II instrument in evaluating the development process and quality of current national academy of clinical biochemistry guidelines. Clin Chem. 2012;58:1426–37.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. MacDermid JC, Brooks D, Solway S, Switzer-McIntyre S, Brosseau L, Graham ID. Reliability and validity of the AGREE instrument used by physical therapists in assessment of clinical practice guidelines. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Berk Hazir.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hazir, B., Haberal, H.B., Asci, A. et al. Erectile dysfunction management: a critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines with the AGREE II instrument. Int J Impot Res 34, 471–476 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-021-00442-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-021-00442-7

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links