Introduction:

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are pharmacotherapeutic guidelines aimed at assisting healthcare professionals in decision-making; therefore, the number of CPGs is vast and continues to grow. In order to minimise variability in guideline quality, the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was developed, which provides a structured method to assess the methodological quality of a clinical practice guideline.

Objective:

To evaluate diagnostic, therapeutic, and diagnostic-therapeutic clinical practice guidelines that are freely and publicly available in Uruguay.

Method:

Observational study based on a structured review of institutional and national clinical practice guidelines in Uruguay.

Results:

8 Uruguayan CPGs were included in the analysis: 3 diagnostic, 1 therapeutic, and 4 diagnostic-therapeutic. Of the total included, 7 (87.5%) were considered recommended for use in our setting, 6 (75%) of them with modifications, while 1 was not recommended (chronic kidney disease). 50% of the CPGs proposed periodic updates; however, none had been updated since their publication.

Conclusions:

The national guidelines analysed show low methodological quality. It is essential that, in the development of CPGs in our setting, rigorous processes are applied to ensure adequate methodological quality and that studies with populations similar to ours are selected.

        · abstract in Spanish | Portuguese     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )