RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Availability, scope, and quality of monkeypox clinical management guidelines globally: a systematic review
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.06.09.22276219
DO 10.1101/2022.06.09.22276219
A1 Webb, Eika
A1 Rigby, Ishmeala
A1 Michelen, Melina
A1 Dagens, Andrew
A1 Cheng, Vincent
A1 Rojek, Amanda
A1 Dahmash, Dania
A1 Khader, Susan
A1 Gedela, Keerti
A1 Norton, Alice
A1 Cevik, Muge
A1 Cai, Erhui
A1 Harriss, Eli
A1 Lipworth, Samuel
A1 Nartowski, Robert
A1 Groves, Helen
A1 Hart, Peter
A1 Blumberg, Lucille
A1 Fletcher, Tom
A1 Jacob, Shevin T
A1 Sigfrid, Louise
A1 Horby, Peter
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/06/14/2022.06.09.22276219.abstract
AB Background Monkeypox (MPX) is an important human orthopoxvirus infection. There has been an increase in MPX cases and outbreaks in endemic and non-endemic regions in recent decades. We appraised the availability, scope, quality, and inclusivity of clinical management guidelines for MPX globally.Methods For this systematic review, we searched six databases from inception until 14 Oct. 2021, augmented by a grey literature search until 17 May 2022. MPX guidelines providing treatment and supportive care recommendations were included, with no exclusions for language. Two reviewers assessed the guidelines. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool.Results Of 2026 records screened, 14 guidelines were included. Overall, most guidelines were of low-quality with a median score of 2 out of 7 (range: 1-7), lacked detail and covered a narrow range of topics. Most guidelines focused on adults, five (36%) provided some advice for children, three (21%) for pregnant women, and three (21%) for people living with HIV. Treatment guidance was mostly limited to advise on antivirals; seven guidelines advised cidofovir (four specified for severe MPX only); 29% (4/14) tecovirimat, and 7% (1/14) brincidofovir. Only one guideline provided recommendations on supportive care and treatment of complications. All guidelines recommended vaccination as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Three guidelines advised on vaccinia immune globulin as PEP for severe cases in people with immunosuppression.Conclusion Our results highlight a concerning lack of evidence-based clinical management guidelines for MPX globally. There is a clear and urgent need for research into treatment and prophylaxis including for different risk populations. The current outbreak provides an opportunity to accelerate this research through coordinated high-quality studies. New evidence should be incorporated into globally accessible guidelines, to benefit patient and epidemic outcomes. A ‘living guideline’ framework is recommended.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020167361Funding statement This work was supported by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Wellcome [215091/Z/18/Z] and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1209135].Competing Interest StatementPeter Hart is a senior research advisor and Helen Groves is a research manager at the Wellcome Trust, which provided part of the funding for this work, but neither had a role in data collection, analysis nor interpretation of the findings. Wellcome supports a range of research funding activities including awards made to ISARIC.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Wellcome [215091/Z/18/Z] and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1209135]. For the purpose of Open Access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. SL is an MRC Clinical Research Training fellow (MR/T001151/1).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data generated or analysed during this study are available on reasonable requests from the corresponding author. AGREEAppraisal of Guidelines for Research and EvaluationAAdultsCConsideredCADTHCanadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in HealthCDCCentre for Disease ControlCChildrenDRCDemocratic Republic of CongoECDCEuropean Centres for Disease Control and PreventionFDAFood and Drug AdministrationFETPSingapore Field Epidemiology Training ProgramHICHigh-income countryHIVHuman immunodeficiency virusHPSCHealth Protection Surveillance CentreHPeople living with HIV/ImmunosuppressionISARICInternational Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection ConsortiumIQRinterquartile rangeIVIntravenousLMICLower-middle income countryMESHMedical Subject HeadingsMoHMinistry of HealthMPXMonkeypoxMPXVMonkeypox virusMVA-BNModified Vaccinia Ankara - Bavarian NordicNANot applicableNCDCNigeria Centre for Disease ControlNGnasogastricNSNot specifiedNSAIDNon-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugsOOlder adultsORSoral rehydration saltsPCRPolymerase chain reactionPEPpost-exposure prophylaxisPHEPublic Health EnglandPRISMAPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-AnalysesPPregnant WomenPROSPEROThe International Prospective Register of Systematic ReviewsRRecommendedUKUnited KingdomUKHSAUnited Kingdom Health Security AgencyUMCUpper-Middle Income CountryUSUnited States of AmericaVIGVaccinia Immune GlobulinWHOWorld Health Organisation