A systematic review of the quality of reporting of interventions in the surgical treatment of Crohn’s anal fistula: an assessment using the TIDiER and Blencowe frameworks

Abstract

Background Crohn’s anal fistula is a challenging condition, and may require multiple surgical procedures. To replicate successful procedures, these must be adequately reported in the literature. The aim of this study was to review the quality of reporting of components of surgical interventions for Crohn’s anal fistula. Methods A systematic review was conducted. It was registered with PROSPERO (CRD:42019135157). The Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for studies reporting interventions intended to close fistula in patients with Crohn’s disease, published between 1999 and August 2019. Abstracts and full texts were screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Dual extraction of data was performed to compare reporting to the TIDiER and Blencowe frameworks for reporting of interventions. Results Initial searches identified 207 unique studies; 38 full texts were screened for inclusion and 33 were included. The most common study design was retrospective cohort (17/33), and the most frequently reported interventions were anal fistula plug (n = 8) and fibrin glue (n = 6). No studies showed coverage of all domains of TIDieR. Reporting was poor among domains related to who provided an intervention, where it was provided, and how it was tailored. Reporting of domains in the Blencowe framework was poor; the majority of studies did not report the component steps of procedures or efforts to standardise them. Conclusions This study demonstrates that reporting on technical aspects of interventions for Crohn’s anal fistula is poor. Surgeons should aim to improve reporting to allow accurate reproduction of techniques both in clinical practice and in clinical trials.

Endoscopic sinusectomy: ‘a rose by any other name’. A systematic review of different endoscopic procedures to treat pilonidal disease

“…The systematic review has also shown huge variation in the quality of reporting, with fewer operative details reported as decreasing the IDEAL stage (Table S2). As recently suggested [50], we also en-…”

“…The systematic review has also shown huge variation in the quality of reporting, with fewer operative details reported as decreasing the IDEAL stage (Table S2). As recently suggested [50], we also encourage journal editors to consider adherence to reporting frameworks when publishing future procedure‐based studies. It is worth noting that the full COHESIVE framework has not yet finished development and other aspects relevant to our study such as the core measurement set and the ENNOVATE video platform are still in progress [51].…”

Completeness of intervention description in invasive cardiology trials: an observational study of ClinicalTrials.gov registry and corresponding publications

“…TIDieR checklist has previously been used to assess interventions in rehabilitation medicine ( 16 , 17 ), surgery ( 18 ), educational ( 19 ) and public health interventions ( 10 ), as well as a tool to assess interventions used in systematic reviews ( 20 , 21 ). In cardiology, a single study looked at adherence to the TIDieR checklist in cardiology journals, which included only higher-impact journals ( 9 ).…”

“…A previous analysis of reporting of surgical interventions showed poor adherence to the TIDieR checklist ( 26 ). A systematic review of non-pharmacological interventions in Crohn’s disease showed that no studies had coverage of all domains of TIDieR ( 18 ). In a recently published study on nonsurgical periodontal therapy, adherence to the TIDieR checklist was also low, with discrepancies between registries and published articles ( 27 ).…”