Does evidence-based medicine help the development of clinical practice guidelines?

Evidence-Based Surgery: What Can Intra-Operative Images Contribute?

Evidence-based medicine integrates results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses, combining the best external evidence with individual clinical expertise and patients' preferences. However, RCTs of surgery differ from those of medicine in that surgical performance is often assumed to be consistent. Yet, evaluating whether each surgery is performed to the same standard is quite challenging. As a primary issue, the novelty of this review is to emphasize-with a focus on orthopedic trauma-the advantage of having complete intra-operative image documentation, allowing the direct evaluation of the quality of the intra-operative technical performance. The absence of complete intra-operative image documentation leads to the inhomogeneity of case series, yielding inconsistent results due to the impossibility of a secondary analysis. Thus, comparisons and the reproduction of studies are difficult. Access to complete intra-operative image data in surgical RCTs allows not only secondary analysis but also comparisons with similar cases. Such complete data can be included in electronic papers. Offering these data to peers-in an accessible link-when presenting papers facilitates the selection process and improves publications for readers. Additionally, having access to the full set of image data for all presented cases serves as a rich resource for learning. It enables the reader to sift through the information and pinpoint the details that are most relevant to their individual needs, allowing them to potentially incorporate this knowledge into daily practice. A broad use of the concept of complete intra-operative image documentation is pivotal for bridging the gap between clinical research findings and real-world applications. Enhancing the quality of surgical RCTs would facilitate the equalization of evidence acquisition in both internal medicine and surgery. Joint effort by surgeons, scientific societies, publishers, and healthcare authorities is needed to support the ideas, implement economic requirements, and overcome the mental obstacles to its realization.

Clinical Outcomes with and without Adherence to Evidence-Based Medicine Guidelines for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Fusion Patients

INTRODUCTION

Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS) patients are treated with instrumented fusion, following EBM guidelines, and typically have excellent clinical outcomes. However, not all lumbar fusion procedures adhere to EBM guidelines, typically due to a lack of prospective data.

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study compared outcomes of DS lumbar fusion patients treated according to EBM guidelines (EBM concordant) to lumbar fused patients with procedures that did not have clear EBM literature that supported this treatment, the goal being to examine the value of present EBM to guide clinical care.

METHODS

A total of 125 DS patients were considered EBM concordant, while 21 patients were EBM discordant. Pre- and postsurgical ODI scores were collected. Clinical outcomes were stratified into substantial clinical benefit (SCB ΔODI >10 points), minimal clinical importance benefit (MCID ΔODI ≥ 5 points), no MCID (ΔODI < 5 points), and a group that showed no change or worsening ODI. Fisher's exact and χ2 tests for categorical variables, Student's t-test for continuous variables, and descriptive statistics were used. Statistical tests were computed at the 95% level of confidence.

RESULTS

Analysis of 125 degenerative spondylolisthesis patients was performed comparing preoperative and postoperative (6 months) ODI scores. ODI improved by 8 points in the EBM concordant group vs. 2.1 points in the EBM discordant group (p = 0.002). Compliance with EBM guidelines was associated with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.93 for achieving MCID ([CI]: 1.12-7.58, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients whose lumbar fusions met EBM criteria had better self-reported outcomes at six months than those who did not meet the requirements. A greater knowledge set is needed to help further support EBM-guided patient care.

A quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines with recommendations for family involvement in the care of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar mood disorder, and major depressive disorder: Critical appraisal utilizing AGREE II

INTRODUCTION

Evidence suggests that family-center collaborative care is useful for individuals identified with chronic mental illness. Clinical practice guidelines offer specific recommendations primarily based on to be had studies and are beneficial in informing evidence-based practice and guiding destiny studies.

OBJECTIVE

Identify current scientific practice guidelines including family-center collaborative care suggestions for individuals with Bipolar Mood Disorder, Schizophrenia, and Major Depressive Disorder and analyze the selection of guidelines for their methodological quality.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on seven electronic databases (G-I-N), (NICE), (MOH), (SIGN), (WHO), (NIH) and (APA) and additional sources. Three referees independently reviewed articles and selected guidelines for inclusion criteria. Subsequently, 18 trained appraisers independently assessed all 15 guidelines using AGREE II.

RESULTS

The mean scores for domains and overall quality were computed. For the overall assessment of the guidelines, 60% reached the quality threshold with domain scores of 60%. The overall average quality rating for these guidelines was 58/29%.

CONCLUSION

The applicability of the guidelines needs to be improved in order to improve their relevance and clinical utilization. As individuals with chronic mental illnesses progress through their disease course, families and health care providers play a crucial role in helping them. The analysis of research knowledge on effective rehabilitation techniques, including the involvement of families in treatment, can be enhanced by using well-developed and appropriate methods.

Impact and use of reviews and 'overviews of reviews' to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines are systematically developed recommendations to assist practitioner and patient decisions about treatments for clinical conditions. High quality and comprehensive systematic reviews and 'overviews of systematic reviews' (overviews) represent the best available evidence. Many guideline developers, such as the WHO and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, recommend the use of these research syntheses to underpin guideline recommendations. We aim to evaluate the impact and use of systematic reviews with and without pairwise meta-analysis or network meta-analyses (NMAs) and overviews in clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

CPGs will be retrieved from Turning Research Into Practice and Epistemonikos (2017-2018). The retrieved citations will be sorted randomly and then screened sequentially by two independent reviewers until 50 CPGs have been identified. We will include CPGs that provide at least two explicit recommendations for the management of any clinical condition. We will assess whether reviews or overviews were cited in a recommendation as part of the development process for guidelines. Data extraction will be done independently by two authors and compared. We will assess the risk of bias by examining how each guideline developed clinical recommendations. We will calculate the number and frequency of citations of reviews with or without pairwise meta-analysis, reviews with NMAs and overviews, and whether they were systematically or non-systematically developed. Results will be described, tabulated and categorised based on review type (reviews or overviews). CPGs reporting the use of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be compared with those using a different system, and pharmacological versus non-pharmacological CPGs will be compared.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics approval is required. We will present at the Cochrane Colloquium and the Guidelines International Network conference.

The methodological quality of guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia: A systematic review

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVES

Clinical practice guidelines serve as a framework for physicians to make decisions and to support best practice for optimizing patient care. However, if the guidelines do not address all the important components of optimal care sufficiently, the quality and validity of the guidelines can be reduced. The objectives of this study were to systematically review current guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), evaluate their methodological quality and highlight the similarities and differences in their recommendations for empirical antibiotic and antibiotic de-escalation strategies.

METHODS

This review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to September 2017 for relevant guidelines. Other databases such as NICE, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and the websites of professional societies were also searched for relevant guidelines. The quality and reporting of included guidelines were assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) instrument.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Six guidelines were eligible for inclusion in our review. Among 6 domains of AGREE-II, "clarity of presentation" scored the highest (80.6%), whereas "applicability" scored the lowest (11.8%). All the guidelines supported the antibiotic de-escalation strategy, whereas the majority of the guidelines (5 of 6) recommended that empirical antibiotic therapy should be implemented in accordance with local microbiological data. All the guidelines suggested that for early-onset HAP/VAP, therapy should start with a narrow spectrum empirical antibiotic such as penicillin or cephalosporins, whereas for late-onset HAP/VAP, the guidelines recommended the use of a broader spectrum empirical antibiotic such as the penicillin extended spectrum carbapenems and glycopeptides.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS

Expert guidelines promote the judicious use of antibiotics and prevent antibiotic overuse. The quality and validity of available HAP/VAP guidelines would be enhanced by improving their adherence to accepted best practice for the management of HAP and VAP.

Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines and School Nursing

The use of evidence-based practice (EBP) has become the standard of health care practice. Nurses are expected to use best evidence on a wide range of topics, yet most nurses have limited time, resources, and/or skills to access and evaluate the quality of research and evidence needed to practice evidence-based nursing. EBP guidelines allow nurses and other health care workers to have research information collected, analyzed, and condensed into specific practice recommendations by experts. This article defines EBP guidelines and discusses the process of guideline development, including identification of topics, systematic literature searches, and evaluation and rating of research. Criteria for determining the quality of existing guidelines are reviewed. The steps needed to develop EBP guidelines specifically for school nursing are discussed.

[Advantages and disadvantages of different methods for the implementation and the support of standard operating procedures: From PDF files to an app- and webbased SOP management system]

BACKGROUND

The quality assurance of care and patient safety, with increasing cost pressure and performance levels is of major importance in the high-risk and high cost area of the operating room (OR). Standard operating procedures (SOP) are an established tool for structuring and standardization of the clinical treatment pathways and show multiple benefits for quality assurance and process optimization.

OBJECTIVES

An internal project was initiated in the department of anesthesiology and a continuous improvement process was carried out to build up a comprehensive SOP library.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the first step the spectrum of procedures in anesthesiology was transferred to PDF-based SOPs. The further development to an app-based SOP library (Aesculapp) was due to the high resource expenditure for the administration and maintenance of the large PDF-based SOP collection and to deficits in the mobile availability. The next developmental stage, the SOP healthcare information assistant (SOPHIA) included a simplified and advanced update feature, an archive feature previously missing and notably the possibility to share the SOP library with other departments including the option to adapt each SOP to the individual situation. A survey of the personnel showed that the app-based allocation of SOPs (Aesculapp, SOPHIA) had a higher acceptance than the PDF-based developmental stage SOP form.

CONCLUSION

The SOP management system SOPHIA combines the benefits of the forerunner version Aesculapp with improved options for intradepartmental maintenance and administration of the SOPs and the possibility of an export and editing function for interinstitutional exchange of SOPs.

Guideline summary review: An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The North American Spine Society's (NASS) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis features evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The guideline updates the 2008 guideline on this topic and is intended to reflect contemporary treatment concepts for symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis as reflected in the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of May 2013. The NASS guideline on this topic is the only guideline on degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis included in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC).

PURPOSE

The purpose of this guideline is to provide an evidence-based educational tool to assist spine specialists when making clinical decisions for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. This article provides a brief summary of the evidence-based guideline recommendations for diagnosing and treating patients with this condition.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of clinical studies relevant to degenerative spondylolisthesis was carried out.

METHODS

This NASS spondyolisthesis guideline is the product of the Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Work Group of NASS' Evidence-Based Guideline Development Committee. The methods used to develop this guideline are detailed in the complete guideline and technical report available on the NASS website. In brief, a multidisciplinary work group of spine care specialists convened to identify clinical questions to address in the guideline. The literature search strategy was developed in consultation with medical librarians. Upon completion of the systematic literature search, evidence relevant to the clinical questions posed in the guideline was reviewed. Work group members used the NASS evidentiary table templates to summarize study conclusions, identify study strengths and weaknesses, and assign levels of evidence. Work group members participated in webcasts and in-person recommendation meetings to update and formulate evidence-based recommendations and incorporate expert opinion when necessary. The draft guidelines were submitted to an internal peer review process and ultimately approved by the NASS Board of Directors. Upon publication, the Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis guideline was accepted into the NGC and will be updated approximately every 5 years.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven clinical questions were addressed in this guideline update, including 15 clinical questions from the original guideline and 12 new clinical questions. The respective recommendations were graded by strength of the supporting literature, which was stratified by levels of evidence. Twenty-one new or updated recommendations or consensus statements were issued and 13 recommendations or consensus statements were maintained from the original guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical guideline was created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and best available evidence to aid practitioners in the care of patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, literature search parameters, literature attrition flow chart, suggestions for future research, and all of the references, is available electronically on the NASS website at https://www.spine.org/Pages/ResearchClinicalCare/QualityImprovement/ClinicalGuidelines.aspx and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

Value of a small control group for estimating intervention effectiveness: results from simulations of immunization effectiveness studies

AIM

To improve evidence for public health practice, the conduct of effectiveness studies by practitioners is needed and may be stimulated if knowledge that smaller than usual samples may provide the same reliability of intervention effect size as larger samples.

MATERIALS & METHODS

We examined reliability of intervention effect using computerized simulations of 2000 hypothetical immunization effectiveness studies from an actual study population and by small (30 and 60) and larger (100 and 200) control groups compared with an intervention group of 200 participants.

RESULTS & CONCLUSION

Across simulated studies, the mean intervention effect (14%) and effect sizes were equivalent regardless of control group size and equal to the actual study effect. These results are relevant for similarly designed and executed studies and indicate that studies with smaller control groups can generate valid and accurate evidence for effective public health practice in communities.

Guidelines in cardiac clinical practice: evaluation of their methodological quality using the AGREE II instrument

Although clinical guidelines have an influential role in healthcare practice, their development process and the evidence they cite has been subject to criticism. This study evaluates the quality of guidelines in cardiac clinical practice by examining how they adhere to validated methodological standards in guideline development. A structured review of cardiac clinical practice guidelines published in seven cardiovascular journals between January 2001 and May 2011 was performed. The AGREE II assessment tool was used by two researchers to evaluate guideline quality. A total of 101 guidelines were identified. Assessment of guidelines using AGREE II found methodological quality to be highly variable (median score, 58.70%; range, 45.34-76.40%). 'Scope and purpose' (median score, 86.1%) and 'clarity of development' (median score, 83.3 %) were the two domains within AGREE II that received the highest scores. Applicability (median score, 20.80%; range, 4.20-54.20%) and editorial independence (median score, 33.30%; range, 0-62.50%) had the lowest scores. There is considerable variability in the quality of cardiac clinical practice guidelines and this has not improved over the last 10 years. Incorporating validated guideline assessment tools, such as AGREE II, may improve the quality of guidelines.

The current state of evidence-based protocols in wound care

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines have blossomed in the last 10 years in medicine as well as wound care. The physician practicing wound care and attempting to use published clinical practice guidelines may, however, have difficulty judging the quality of these guidelines given legitimate concerns that many aspects of clinical practice guidelines are not being properly addressed.

METHODS

Guidelines were located using the National Guideline Clearinghouse Web site, PubMed, and the Cochrane database for reviews on diabetic foot ulcers, venous ulcers, and pressure ulcers. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation instrument was used to evaluate guidelines.

RESULTS

Search engines returned many irrelevant guidelines. Many guidelines would be difficult to evaluate by clinicians not versed in guideline evaluation and were cumbersome in format or were presented more as reference works. Too little attention is focused on such issues as clarity of presentation, consideration of multidisciplinary panels, stakeholder involvement, validity, testing, settings, resources required, cost impact, methods of addressing guideline implementation, and a means of tracking important criteria for feedback once the guideline is in the field. The venous and diabetic ulcer guidelines that were formally evaluated scored poorly in many of these areas despite using relatively sound methods for gathering and evaluating the evidence. Only the developers of one guideline made a commitment for regular update.

CONCLUSION

Although progress has been made in regard to wound care clinical practice guidelines, much more work will be required before such guidelines are highly accepted by wound care clinicians.

An evidence-based clinical guideline for the use of antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The objective of the North American Spine Society (NASS) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline on antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery was to provide evidence-based recommendations to address key clinical questions surrounding the use of antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery. The guideline is intended to address these questions based on the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of February 2008. The goal of the guideline recommendations was to assist in delivering optimum, efficacious treatment with the goal of preventing thromboembolic events.

PURPOSE

To provide an evidence-based, educational tool to assist spine surgeons in minimizing the risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE).

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and evidence-based clinical guideline.

METHODS

This report is from the Antithrombotic Therapies Work Group of the NASS Evidence-Based Guideline Development Committee. The work group was composed of multidisciplinary spine care specialists, all of whom were trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. Each member of the group was involved in formatting a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group. The final questions agreed on by the group are the subject of this report. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional, evidence-based databases. The relevant literature was then independently rated by at least three reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Final grades of recommendation for the answers to each clinical question were arrived at via Web casts among members of the work group using standardized grades of recommendation. When Level I to IV evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation to answer a specific clinical question, expert consensus was arrived at by the work group through the modified nominal group technique and is clearly identified as such in the guideline.

RESULTS

Fourteen clinical questions were formulated, addressing issues of incidence of DVT and PE in spine surgery and recommendations regarding utilization of mechanical prophylaxis and chemoprophylaxis in spine surgery. The answers to these 14 clinical questions are summarized in this article. The respective recommendations were graded by the strength of the supporting literature that was stratified by levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical guideline addressing the use of antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and using the best available evidence as a tool to assist spine surgeons in minimizing the risk of DVT and PE. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all references, is available electronically at the NASS Web site (www.spine.org) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The objective of the North American Spine Society (NASS) evidence-based clinical guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is to provide evidence-based recommendations on key clinical questions concerning the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The guideline is intended to address these questions based on the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of January 2007. The goal of the guideline recommendations is to assist the practitioner in delivering optimum, efficacious treatment of and functional recovery from this common disorder.

PURPOSE

To provide an evidence-based, educational tool to assist spine care providers in improving the quality and efficiency of care delivered to patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and evidence-based clinical guideline.

METHODS

This report is from the Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Work Group of the NASS Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Development Committee. The work group was comprised of multidisciplinary spine care specialists, all of whom were trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. Each member participated in the development of a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group. The final questions agreed on by the group are the subject of this report. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology) and four additional, evidence-based, databases. The relevant literature was then independently rated by at least three reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Final grades of recommendation for the answer to each clinical question were arrived at via face-to-face meetings among members of the work group using standardized grades of recommendation. When Level I-IV evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation to answer a specific clinical question, expert consensus was arrived at by the work group through the modified nominal group technique and is clearly identified as such in the guideline.

RESULTS

Nineteen clinical questions were formulated, addressing issues of prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The answers to these 19 clinical questions are summarized in this document. The respective recommendations were graded by the strength of the supporting literature that was stratified by levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical guideline for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and using the best available evidence as a tool to aid practitioners involved with the care of this condition. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all references, is available electronically at the NASS Web site (www.spine.org) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

Revisioning social work clinical education: recent developments in relation to evidence-based practice

An evidence-based practice (EBP) movement is underway in social work that promises to change the very nature and methods of clinical education and practice. Growing demands for accountability, increasingly sophisticated clients, heightened threats of malpractice liability, and a host of additional factors arising within and external to the profession have contributed to the growth of EBP. This review examines indices of the growing influence of EBP, reasons for the emergence of EBP, misgivings about and potentially positive features of EBP, and examines one school of social work's efforts to implement an evidence-based clinical practice curriculum. It is important that clinicians be aware of current developments in relation to evidence-based clinical education and practice as these will likely significantly shape the face of social work direct practice in the coming years.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in spine surgery: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the use of prophylactic antibiotics in spine surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The objective of the North American Spine Society's (NASS) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline on Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Spine Surgery is to provide evidence-based recommendations on key clinical questions concerning the use of prophylactic antibiotics in spine surgery. The guideline is intended to address these questions based on the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of December 2006. The goal of the guideline recommendations is to assist in delivering optimum, efficacious treatment to prevent surgical site infection.

PURPOSE

To provide an evidence-based, educational tool to assist spine surgeons in preventing surgical site infections.

STUDY DESIGN

Evidence-based Clinical Guideline.

METHODS

This report is from the Antibiotic Prophylaxis Work Group of the NASS's Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Development Committee. The work group comprised multidisciplinary surgical spine care specialists, who were trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. Each member of the group formatted a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group. The final questions agreed upon by the group are the subjects of this report. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional, evidence-based, databases. The relevant literature was then independently rated by at least three reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Final grades of recommendation for the answer to each clinical question were arrived at via Webcast meetings among members of the work group using standardized grades of recommendation. When Level I to Level IV evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation to answer a specific clinical question, expert consensus was arrived at by the work group through the modified nominal group technique and is clearly identified in the guideline.

RESULTS

Eleven clinical questions addressed the efficacy and appropriateness of antibiotic prophylaxis protocols, repeat dosing, discontinuation, wound drains, and special considerations related to the potential impact of comorbidities on antibiotic prophylaxis. The responses to these 11 clinical questions are summarized in this document. The respective recommendations were graded by the strength of the supported literature which was stratified by levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical guideline addressing the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in spine surgery has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and the best available evidence. This educational tool will assist spine surgeons in preventing surgical site infections. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and references, is available electronically at the NASS Web site (www.spine.org) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

Using consensus methods to develop clinical practice guidelines for intensive care: the intensive care collaborative project

BACKGROUND

Clinical practices or procedures based on the best available evidence are an essential resource within an intensive care unit (ICU). Maintaining the currency of a local clinical practice manual is challenging however, particularly in relation to the time required, other workload pressures and the availability of staff with relevant skills to interrogate the literature. The aim of the Intensive Care Collaborative (ICC) project was to use the synergism of group processes to develop state-based clinical guidelines for six common intensive care practices - eye care, oral care, endotracheal tube management, suctioning, arterial line management, and central venous catheter (CVC) management.

METHODS

Participants were 55 senior nurse clinicians from all nine area health services in NSW, seven academic facilitators, and staff from the Intensive Care Coordination and Monitoring Unit (ICCMU). A range of approaches were used to develop the six clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and related systematic literature reviews, including a preparatory educational seminar for participants, formation of working groups of clinicians, with subsequent teleconferences, e-mail and online forums to identify the scope of each guideline and review the literature. A consensus development conference (CDC) was conducted to finalise the reviews with a nominal group technique (NGT) used to develop recommendations for practice. External Validation Panels (EVP) verified the recommendations in each clinical practice guideline. Group voting was undertaken using a Likert scale (1-3 disagree, 4-6 neutral, 7-9 agree) with consensus agreement set as a median of at least seven.

RESULTS

Eighty-three recommendations for practice were developed for the six Clinical Practice Guidelines; 50% were based on research literature evidence (23% with high levels of evidence). The balance were based on consensus opinion of the panel members. Only five recommendations were not validated by external validation.

CONCLUSION

This project has demonstrated a method for guideline development that is robust, incorporating evidence from research and clinical expertise utilising an objective egalitarian framework.

The impact of cancer research: how publications influence UK cancer clinical guidelines

There has been a substantially increased interest in biomedical research impact assessment over the past 5 years. This can be studied by a number of methods, but its influence on clinical guidelines must rank as one of the most important. In cancer, there are 43 UK guidelines (and associated Health Technology Assessments) published (up to October 2006) across three series, each of which has an evidence base in the form of references, many of which are papers in peer-reviewed journals. These have all been identified and analysed to determine their geographical provenance and type of research, in comparison with overall oncology research published in the peak years of guideline references (1999–2001). The UK papers were cited nearly three times as frequently as would have been expected from their presence in world oncology research (6.5%). Within the United Kingdom, Edinburgh and Glasgow stood out for their unexpectedly high contributions to the guidelines' scientific base. The cited papers from the United Kingdom acknowledged much more explicit funding from all sectors than did the UK cancer research papers at the same research level.

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The objective of the North American Spine Society (NASS) evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) is to provide evidence-based recommendations to address key clinical questions surrounding the diagnosis and treatment of DLSS. The guideline is intended to reflect contemporary treatment concepts for symptomatic DLSS as reflected in the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of April 2006. The goals of the guideline recommendations are to assist in delivering optimum, efficacious treatment, and functional recovery from this spinal disorder.

PURPOSE

To provide an evidence-based tool that assists practitioners in improving the quality and efficiency of care delivered to patients with DLSS.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Evidence-based clinical guideline.

METHODS

This report is from the Spinal Stenosis Work Group of the NASS Clinical Guidelines Committee. The work group comprised medical, diagnostic, interventional, and surgical spinal care specialists, all of whom were trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. In the development of this guideline, the work group arrived at a consensus definition of a working diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis by use of a modification of the nominal group technique. Each member of the group formatted a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group and the final list of questions agreed on by the group is the subject of this report. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific literature search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional, evidence-based, databases. The relevant literature to answer each clinical question was then independently rated by at least two reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Any discrepancies in evidence levels among the initial raters were resolved by at least two additional members' review of the reference and independent rating. Final grades of recommendation for the answer to each clinical question were arrived at in face-to-face meetings among members of the work group using the NASS-adopted standardized grades of recommendation. When Levels I to IV evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation to answer a specific clinical question, expert consensus was arrived at by the work group through the modified nominal group technique and is clearly identified as such in the guideline.

RESULTS

Eighteen clinical questions were asked, addressing issues of prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment of DLSS. The answers to these 18 clinical questions are summarized in this document along with their respective levels of evidence and grades of recommendation in support of these answers.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical guideline for DLSS has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and using the best available evidence as a tool to aid both practitioners and patients involved with the care of this disease. The entire guideline document including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all references is available electronically at the NASS Web site (www.spine.org) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

Qualitative health research in the era of evidence-based practice

Evidence-based health care (EBHC) sets the tone in health care and health care research nowadays. Qualitative health researchers have to position themselves in a world that is dominated by it. The popularity of EBHC is not due to the rationality of its tenets. In this article, the author addresses major problems in EBHC. Qualitative research is important for providing the understanding that is necessary to apply findings from quantitative research properly and safely. Basic studies about the human experience in illness and regarding human behavior and meaning in general remain of great value, even in the era of EBHC. Qualitative research also plays an important role in developing scholarship.

Klinischer Behandlungspfad „laparoskopische Prostatektomie“

METHODS

In this study we investigated the anesthesiological module of a clinical pathway. We chose the pathway of "laparoscopic prostatectomy" as an example for time-consuming minimally invasive surgery and 40 patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups receiving either total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) using propofol/ remifentanil or balanced minimal flow anesthesia using desflurane/ remifentanil. During this module the indicators of quality such as vigilance, pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and mobilization were measured. Costs were evaluated and analyzed by a bottom-up procedure.

RESULTS

There were no anesthesia-related deviations from clinical pathways and both forms of anesthesia management were equally well tolerated by the patients. No significant difference was observed regarding hemodynamic measurements or PONV. The patients in the desflurane/ remifentanil group recovered more rapidly (p=0.037) and had more pain. The amount of analgesic agents given immediately following anesthesia was significantly higher than in the TIVA group (p=0.017). The median anesthesia costs per minute for laparoscopic prostatectomy in the propofol group were 2.79 EUR (minimum cost 2.41 EUR, maximum cost 3.21 EUR) and in the desflurane group 2.68 EUR (minimum cost 2.45 EUR, maximum cost 3.39 EUR). The total anesthesia costs for both groups were within the proceeds matrix range for diagnosis-related groups (DRG). However, the cost analysis for medication was slightly higher than the proceeds matrix range for DRGs.

CONCLUSION

Both forms of anesthesia can be implemented for time-consuming surgical procedures and allow a cost-effective anesthesia management. Anesthesiological procedures must go hand-in-hand with the type of anesthesia selected. The prophylactic use of analgetics for desflurane/ remifentanil anesthesia should be given earlier and in higher doses than in propofol/ remifentanil anesthesia. The prophylactic use of antiemetics following laparoscopic procedures of long duration is indicated. Optimizing anesthesiological procedures could lead to a continuous improvement in the quality of therapeutic pathways.

Towards more effective use of decision support in clinical practice: what the guidelines for guidelines don’t tell you

The Brisbane Cardiac Consortium Clinical Support Systems Program used multiple strategies in optimising quality of care of patients with either of two cardiac conditions. One of these strategies was the development and active implementation of decision support systems centred on evidence-based, locally agreed clinical practice guidelines. Our experience in undertaking this task highlighted numerous operational challenges for which solutions were difficult to extract from existing published literature. In the present article we provide a methodology grounded in both theory and real-world experience that may assist others in developing and implementing systems of guideline-based decision support.

A proposal for a practical treatment guideline designed for the initial two-hours of the management of patients with acute severe asthma and COPD using the principles of evidence-based medicine

We have proposed a clinical treatment guideline for the management of acute, severe asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonarydisease (COPD) using the principles of evidence-based medicine. The content is based upon practical clinical issues in need of consensus. A previous study has shown that this particular area is in serious need of quality control. Based on a strict 2 h time schedule with a unified treatment plan for both asthma and COPD, it is possible to secure for the patients a well-documented medical therapy promoting decision-making and clarification of the patient within this time limit. A summary of the statements is presented in a one-page, user-friendly format in order to cope with the clinician's need of having access to published evidence quickly and easily. A website (www.phanareth.dk or a website provided by Respiratory Medicine) has been established providing regular updates. A strategy for the implementation and the evaluation process has been planned after the publication of this paper. We believe this approach to be an important step towards an increase in the quality of guidelines and also a tool to make "guideline writers" aware of the responsibility of making their recommendations work.

Influence of deviation from guidelines on the outcome of community-acquired pneumonia

STUDY OBJECTIVE

s: Consensus guidelines for the empirical treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) have been published. We investigated the following factors: (1) the degree of adherence to American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the Spanish Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR) guidelines; and (2) the influence of adhering to these guidelines on mortality and length of hospitalization.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

Two hundred ninety-five patients with CAP who were consecutively admitted to the hospital and treated empirically.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were stratified according to the prognostic rule of Fine, and the antibiotic regimen prescribed in the first 24 h was evaluated as to whether or not it adhered to treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

Adherence to SEPAR and ATS guidelines was 66% and 88%, respectively. There were no significant differences in mortality or duration of hospitalization between adherent and nonadherent regimens. However, mortality in severe CAP (Fine risk class V) was significantly higher in patients with nonadherent treatments (SEPAR: relative risk [RR], 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 5.6; ATS: RR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8). In a multivariate analysis, adherence to ATS guidelines was independently associated with decreased mortality (RR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.9) after adjusting for the Fine score.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence was higher to ATS guidelines than to SEPAR guidelines. Severe CAP had a significantly higher mortality when the guidelines (both ATS and SEPAR) were not followed. Length of hospitalization was similar irrespective of adherence to either set of guidelines.

Citation of randomized evidence in support of guidelines of therapeutic and preventive interventions

Guideline statements may be supported by evidence obtained from various study designs, but randomized trials are usually considered most important for making recommendations about therapeutic and preventive interventions. This study evaluated the extent to which randomized trials are cited in guidelines published in major journals. The references of 191 guidelines of therapeutic and/or preventive interventions published in Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet, NEJM and Pediatrics in 1979, 1984, 1989, 1994, and 1999, were analyzed. The percentage of guidelines not citing any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) decreased gradually from 95% in 1979 to 53% in 1999. Among 4,853 references of the guidelines, there were 393 RCTs (8.1% of total), 19 systematic reviews (0.4%), and 23 meta-analyses of RCTs (0.5%). Among 19 guidelines published in 1999 or 1994 with <2 RCTs cited, in eight cases additional pertinent RCTs were identified that had not been cited by the guideline. There is a clear increase in the use of randomized evidence by guidelines over time. However, several guidelines in major journals still cite few or no RCTs.

Practice parameters: background and usefulness

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The number of clinical practice parameters has been increasing in recent years. A more complete understanding of the development of parameters will help the clinician understand the purpose of practice parameters and how to use them in their clinical practice.

DATA SOURCE

The MEDLINE database was used to review the recent English language literature about practice parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall goal of practice parameters is to improve patient care. Practice parameters may be considered a major tool that can aid the clinician in decision-making, and improve overall health care for patients. They can help reduce unwanted variation in clinical practice and help physicians make more efficient use of resources. Practice parameters can also be used as teaching tools, reference documents, and aids to help defend patient care decisions, particularly in managed health care situations.

Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions : an evidence-based guideline

OBJECTIVE

A panel was convened by the Health and Science Policy Committee of the American College of Chest Physicians to develop a clinical practice guideline on the medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions (PPE) using evidence-based methods.

OPTIONS AND OUTCOMES CONSIDERED

Based on consensus of clinical opinion, the expert panel developed an annotated table for evaluating the risk for poor outcome in patients with PPE. Estimates of the risk for poor outcome were based on the clinical judgment that, without adequate drainage of the pleural space, the patient with PPE would be likely to have any or all of the following: prolonged hospitalization, prolonged evidence of systemic toxicity, increased morbidity from any drainage procedure, increased risk for residual ventilatory impairment, increased risk for local spread of the inflammatory reaction, and increased mortality. Three variables, pleural space anatomy, pleural fluid bacteriology, and pleural fluid chemistry, were used in this annotated table to categorize patients into four separate risk levels for poor outcome: categories 1 (very low risk), 2 (low risk), 3 (moderate risk), and 4 (high risk). The panel's consensus opinion supported drainage for patients with moderate (category 3) or high (category 4) risk for a poor outcome, but not for patients with very low (category 1) or low (category 2) risk for a poor outcome. The medical literature was reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of medical and surgical management approaches for patients with PPE at moderate or high risk for poor outcome. The panel grouped PPE management approaches into six categories: no drainage performed, therapeutic thoracentesis, tube thoracostomy, fibrinolytics, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and surgery (including thoracotoiny with or without decortication and rib resection). The fibrinolytic approach required tube thoracostomy for administration of drug, and VATS included post-procedure tube thoracostomy. Surgery may have included concomitant lung resection and always included postoperative tube thoracostomy. All management approaches included appropriate treatment of the underlying pneumonia, including systemic antibiotics. Criteria for including articles in the panel review were adequate data provided for >/=20 adult patients with PPE to allow evaluation of at least one relevant outcome (death or need for a second intervention to manage the PPE); reasonable assurance provided that drainage was clinically appropriate (patients receiving drainage were either category 3 or category 4) and drainage procedure was adequately described; and original data were presented. The strength of panel recommendations on management of PPE was based on the following approach: level A, randomized, controlled trials with consistent results or individual randomized, controlled trial with narrow confidence interval (CI); level B, controlled cohort and case control series; level C, historically controlled series and case series; and level D, expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal or based on physiology, bench research, or "first principles."

EVIDENCE

The literature review revealed 24 articles eligible for full review by the panel, 19 of which dealt with the primary management approach to PPE and 5 with a rescue approach after a previous approach had failed. Of the 19 involving the primary management approach to PPE, there were 3 randomized, controlled trials, 2 historically controlled series, and 14 case series. The number of patients included in the randomized controlled trials was small; methodologic weaknesses were found in the 19 articles describing the results of primary management approaches to PPE. The proportion and 95% CI of patients suffering each of the two relevant outcomes (death and need for a second intervention to manage the PPE) were calculated for the pooled data for each management approach from the 19 articles on the primary management approach. (ABST

Growth factor practice patterns among pediatric oncologists: results of a 1998 Pediatric Oncology Group Survey. Economic Evaluation Working Group the Pediatric Oncology Group

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines on growth factor (GF) use recommend applying adult-derived guidelines in pediatric oncology. An ASCO survey of adult oncology GF use determined the preference for first degree prophylaxis (use of GF when febrile neutropenia [FN] is expected to be high in untreated patients), second-degree prophylaxis (administration of GF after a documented episode of FN on a previous cycle of chemotherapy), and intervention in the treatment of FN. Similar preferences have not been evaluated in pediatrics. The purpose of this study was to (1) characterize GF use in pediatric oncology; (2) correlate use patterns with demographic factors; and (3) compare the Pediatric Oncology Group (POG) and ASCO surveys. The ASCO survey was revised for use within pediatric oncology and was mailed to the physician membership of POG; 341 were returned (86% completion rate). Comparisons were made with the ASCO survey. Most (76%) physicians said GF use was determined by protocol requirements and most (70%) patients were entered on POG protocols. GF use as first-degree prophylaxis was selected 40% of the time, which was significantly greater than in adults; this was most influenced by anticipated duration of neutropenia (> or =7 days). The severity of the initial clinical course (e.g., neutropenia, infection) influenced use in second-degree prophylaxis; dose reduction alone was never selected. For FN, GF use was 45%, with lower preferences in uncomplicated FN (16%-38%) compared with complicated FN (66%). POG respondents endorse greater use of GF for first-and second-degree prophylaxis but less use in uncomplicated FN than do ASCO respondents. These patterns may reflect different strategies, including the role of chemotherapy, value of dose intensity, and perceived toxicity of regimens. Given these differences, adult-based guidelines may not be appropriate for pediatrics.

Acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis

Acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis are one of the major public health challenges. New data suggest that they will remain so for many years. Although the role of bacteria in the initiation and maintenance of bronchial inflammation, both during and between exacerbations, is well recognized, studies of the long-term effects of therapy are few and inadequate, and the nature of the relationship with disease progression is largely unknown. Data are beginning to emerge that firmly link bacterial inflammation and progressive disease with physiological and functional disability. Methods are being developed to provide integrated, uncomplicated and reproducible assessments of health-related quality of life. These may prove fundamental to the proper investigation of new treatment modalities. Among the newer antibacterial agents, fluoroquinolones have received most investigative attention, regrettably usually without providing clinical confirmation of their obvious superiority in vitro and of their pharmacokinetic and related pharmacodynamic properties. New trial designs need to address an integrated outcome analysis, with the assessment of long-term benefit and pharmaco-economic monitoring. More antibacterial agents are available at the millennium than ever before. After 50 years, it would be preferable if we knew a little more about their role in this complex disease.