TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical practice guideline recommendations to improve the mental health of adult trauma patients
T2 - protocol for a systematic review
AU - Bérubé, Mélanie
AU - Bradley, Nori
AU - O'Donnell, Meaghan
AU - Stelfox, Henry Thomas
AU - Garraway, Naisan
AU - Vasiliadis, Helen Maria
AU - Turcotte, Valerie
AU - Perreault, Michel
AU - Menear, Matthew
AU - Archambault, Léonie
AU - Haagsma, Juanita
AU - Provencher, Hélène
AU - Genest, Christine
AU - Gagnon, Marc Aurèle
AU - Bourque, Laurence
AU - Lapierre, Alexandra
AU - Khalfi, Amal
AU - Panenka, William
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024.
PY - 2024/3/25
Y1 - 2024/3/25
N2 - Introduction Mental disorders are common in adult patients with traumatic injuries. To limit the burden of poor psychological well-being in this population, recognised authorities have issued recommendations through clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, the uptake of evidence-based recommendations to improve the mental health of trauma patients has been low until recently. This may be explained by the complexity of optimising mental health practices and interpretating CGPs scope and quality. Our aim is to systematically review CPG mental health recommendations in the context of trauma care and appraise their quality. Methods and analysis We will identify CPG through a search strategy applied to Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, as well as guidelines repositories and websites of trauma associations. We will target CPGs on adult and acute trauma populations including at least one recommendation on any prevention, screening, assessment, intervention, patient and family engagement, referral or follow-up procedure related to mental health endorsed by recognised organisations in high-income countries. No language limitations will be applied, and we will limit the search to the last 15 years. Pairs of reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, full texts, and carry out data extraction and quality assessment of CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. We will synthesise the evidence on recommendations for CPGs rated as moderate or high quality using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation quality of evidence, strength of recommendation, health and social determinants and whether recommendations were made using a population-based approach. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required, as we will conduct secondary analysis of published data. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, at international and national scientific meetings. Accessible summary will be distributed to interested parties through professional, healthcare quality and persons with lived experience associations.
AB - Introduction Mental disorders are common in adult patients with traumatic injuries. To limit the burden of poor psychological well-being in this population, recognised authorities have issued recommendations through clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, the uptake of evidence-based recommendations to improve the mental health of trauma patients has been low until recently. This may be explained by the complexity of optimising mental health practices and interpretating CGPs scope and quality. Our aim is to systematically review CPG mental health recommendations in the context of trauma care and appraise their quality. Methods and analysis We will identify CPG through a search strategy applied to Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, as well as guidelines repositories and websites of trauma associations. We will target CPGs on adult and acute trauma populations including at least one recommendation on any prevention, screening, assessment, intervention, patient and family engagement, referral or follow-up procedure related to mental health endorsed by recognised organisations in high-income countries. No language limitations will be applied, and we will limit the search to the last 15 years. Pairs of reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, full texts, and carry out data extraction and quality assessment of CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. We will synthesise the evidence on recommendations for CPGs rated as moderate or high quality using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation quality of evidence, strength of recommendation, health and social determinants and whether recommendations were made using a population-based approach. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required, as we will conduct secondary analysis of published data. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, at international and national scientific meetings. Accessible summary will be distributed to interested parties through professional, healthcare quality and persons with lived experience associations.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85189718341&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079205
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079205
M3 - Article
C2 - 38531562
AN - SCOPUS:85189718341
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 14
JO - BMJ open
JF - BMJ open
IS - 3
M1 - e079205
ER -