Background and objectiveNeonatal sepsis (NS) continues to be a critical healthcare priority for the coming decades worldwide. The aim of this study was to critically appraise the quality of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for neonatal sepsis and to summarize and compare their recommendations.MethodsThis study involves a systematic review of CPGs. We identified clinical questions and eligibility criteria and searched and screened for CPGs using bibliographic and CPG databases and professional societies. Each included CPG was assessed by four independent appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. We summarized the recommendations in a comparison practical table. The systematic review was drafted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Its protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42021258732).ResultsOur search retrieved 4,432 citations; of which five CPGs were eligible and appraised: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP 2018) (35 and 34 weeks); Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS 2017); National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE 2021); and Queensland Maternity and Neonatal Services (QH 2020). Among these, the overall assessment of two evidence-based CPGs scored > 70% (NICE and QH), which was consistent with their higher scores in the six domains of the AGREE II instrument. In domain 3 (rigor of development), NICE and QH scored 99 and 60%, respectively. In domain 5 (applicability), they scored 96 and 74%, respectively, and in domain 6 (editorial independence), they scored 90 and 71%, respectively.ConclusionThe methodological quality of the NICE CPG was superior followed by the QH CPG with relevant recommendations for use in practice.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021258732, PROSPERO (CRD42021258732).

Background and ObjectiveTo systematically review, critically appraise the quality of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for neonatal hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE), and map their recommendations.Data SourcesCPG databases (GIN, ECRI, NICE, SIGN, DynaMed), Bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL), and related specialized professional societies (e.g., AAP, CPS, BAPM, RCPCH, and SNS).Study SelectionOriginal de-novo developed evidence-based CPGs for HIE, group authorship, Arabic or English languages, and international or national scope. The systematic review was drafted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and Johnston et al methodological guide.Data ExtractionQuality assessment of the included HIE CPGs by the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument and report their characteristics, AGREE II ratings, and recommendationsData SynthesisOur search retrieved 2,489 citations, of which two recent HIE CPGs were eligible and appraised: Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) and Queensland Maternity and Neonatal Services (QMN). The overall assessment of the QMN CPG was superior (83%). Domain 1 (Scope & Purpose) scored (47%, 63%), Domain 2 (Stakeholder Involvement) (72%, 39%), Domain 3 (Rigour of Development) (48%, 43%), Domain 4 (Clarity & Presentation) (100%, 96%), Domain 5 (Applicability) (59%, 9%), and Domain 6 (Editorial Independence) (67%, 17%) for the QMN and CPS CPGs respectively. All appraisers recommended the QMN CPG for use in practice.ConclusionThe methodological quality of the QMN CPG was superior with the relevant recommendations for its use in neonatal practice.Limitationslimited to Arabic and English languages.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=258291, identifier: CRD42021258291.