Research Information System
JOURNAL OF ORAL HEALTH AND ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, vol.14, no.1, 2025 (ESCI)
Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) facilitate safe and effective procedures in implant dentistry. However, approaches to their development are diverse and may vary in quality. This article evaluates the quality of clinical practice guidelines in dental implantology. Methods: A scoping review of CPGs published in implantology was conducted. We searched for CPGs in implantology published between January 2000 and July 2020 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Webpages of 52 national dental associations were also searched. Four researchers assessed the quality of the selected CPGs following the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Results: Ninety CPGs were included for analysis. The 6-domain mean score (M) of all included CPGs was 4.3% with median (Mdn) and standard deviation (SD) values of 0.8 and 4.5, respectively. Domain-specific scaled scores revealed that "scope and purpose" (M = 65.3) and "clarity of presentation" (M = 61.1) were the domains with the highest scaled scores. In contrast, the "applicability" and "editorial independence" had the lowest scaled domain scores (M = 13.7 and M = 46.6, respectively). The mean overall CPG assessment score was 4.3 (Mdn = 4.5; SD = 0.8). Conclusion: Standardized methods for guideline development are already available. Patients' role is critical to ensuring that CPGs meet their values and needs. National dental associations, universities, and researchers need to collaborate in the dissemination of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).