The need for combination antihypertensive therapy to reach target blood pressures: what has been learned from clinical practice and morbidity-mortality trials?

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension represents a cost-effective way for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications. To benefit maximally from antihypertensive treatment blood pressure (BP) should be brought to below 140/90 mmHg in every hypertensive patient, and even lower (< 130/80 mmHg) if diabetes or renal disease co-exists. Most of the time such targets cannot be reached using monotherapies. This is especially true in patients who exhibit a high cardiovascular risk. The co-administration of two agents acting by different mechanisms considerably increases BP control. Such preparations are not only efficacious, but also well tolerated, and some fixed low-dose combinations have a tolerability profile similar to placebo. This is for instance the case for the preparation containing the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril (2 mg) and the diuretic indapamide (0.625 mg), a fixed low-dose combination that has recently been shown in controlled interventional trials to be more effective than monotherapies in reducing albuminuria, regressing cardiac hypertrophy and improving macrovascular stiffness. Fixed-dose combinations are becoming more and more popular and are even proposed by current hypertension guidelines as a first-line option to treat hypertensive patients.

Biologics in rheumatoid arthritis - recommendations for Swiss practice.

The new paradigm of therapy in rheumatoid arthritis is to aim toward early and complete remission, using a larger use of conventional DMARDs and biologic agents. The present recommendations were established through a consensus to help practitioners in their daily use of those agents, to reflect the current "best practice" in Switzerland.

Weekly sport practice and adolescent well-being.

OBJECTIVE: Sport practice is widely encouraged, both in guidelines and in clinical practice, because of its broad range of positive effects on health. However, very limited evidence directly supports this statement among adolescents and the sport duration that we should recommend remains unknown. We aimed to determine sport durations that were associated with poor well-being. METHODS: We conducted a survey including 1245 adolescents (16-20 years) from the general Swiss population. Participants were recruited from various settings (sport centres, peers of sport practicing adolescents, websites) and asked to complete a web-based questionnaire. Weekly sport practice was categorised into four groups: low (0-3.5 h), average (≈ recommended 7 h (3.6-10.5)), high (≈14 h (10.6-17.5)) and very high (>17.5 h). We assessed well-being using the WHO-5 Well-Being Index. RESULTS: Compared with adolescents in the average group, those in the very high group had a higher risk of poor well-being (OR 2.29 (95% CI 1.11 to 4.72)), as did those in the low group (OR 2.33 (1.58 to 3.44)). In contrast, those in the high group had a lower risk of poor well-being than those in the average group (OR 0.46 (0.23 to 0.93)). CONCLUSIONS: We found an inverted, U-shaped relationship between weekly sport practice duration and well-being among adolescents. The peak scores of well-being were around 14 h per week of sport practice, corresponding to twice the recommended 7 h. Practicing higher sport durations was an independent risk factor of poor well-being.

Appropriateness of respiratory care: development of evidence-based guidelines in an acute care hospital

Background: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians, and health services researchers. Methods: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was performed for the period between 1995 and 2008 based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. Publications were assessed according to the Oxford classification of quality of evidence. A working group prepared proposals for recommendations which were then independently rated by a multidisciplinary expert panel. All recommendations were then discussed in common and indications for procedures were rated confidentially a second time by the experts. Each indication for respiratory care was classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate, based on the panel median rating and the degree of intra-panel agreement. Results: Recommendations were formulated for the following procedures: non-invasive ventilation, continuous positive airway pressure, intermittent positive pressure breathing, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, mechanical insufflation-exsufflation, incentive spirometry, positive expiratory pressure, nasotracheal suctioning, noninstrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition, and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of evidence from literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus of experts. Conclusion: Despite a marked heterogeneity of scientific evidence, the method used allowed us to develop commonly agreed local guidelines for respiratory care. In addition, this work fostered a closer relationship between physiotherapists and physicians in our institution.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS).

A group of European experts was commissioned to establish guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) from evidence published up until March 2014, regarding pain, movement disorders, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, tinnitus, depression, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, craving/addiction, and conversion. Despite unavoidable inhomogeneities, there is a sufficient body of evidence to accept with level A (definite efficacy) the analgesic effect of high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the pain and the antidepressant effect of HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). A Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for the antidepressant effect of low-frequency (LF) rTMS of the right DLPFC, HF-rTMS of the left DLPFC for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, and LF-rTMS of contralesional M1 in chronic motor stroke. The effects of rTMS in a number of indications reach level C (possible efficacy), including LF-rTMS of the left temporoparietal cortex in tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. It remains to determine how to optimize rTMS protocols and techniques to give them relevance in routine clinical practice. In addition, professionals carrying out rTMS protocols should undergo rigorous training to ensure the quality of the technical realization, guarantee the proper care of patients, and maximize the chances of success. Under these conditions, the therapeutic use of rTMS should be able to develop in the coming years.

Evaluation of email alerts in practice: Part 2. Validation of the information assessment method.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE:. The information assessment method (IAM) permits health professionals to systematically document the relevance, cognitive impact, use and health outcomes of information objects delivered by or retrieved from electronic knowledge resources. The companion review paper (Part 1) critically examined the literature, and proposed a 'Push-Pull-Acquisition-Cognition-Application' evaluation framework, which is operationalized by IAM. The purpose of the present paper (Part 2) is to examine the content validity of the IAM cognitive checklist when linked to email alerts. METHODS: A qualitative component of a mixed methods study was conducted with 46 doctors reading and rating research-based synopses sent on email. The unit of analysis was a doctor's explanation of a rating of one item regarding one synopsis. Interviews with participants provided 253 units that were analysed to assess concordance with item definitions. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The content relevance of seven items was supported. For three items, revisions were needed. Interviews suggested one new item. This study has yielded a 2008 version of IAM.

131I/123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (mIBG) scintigraphy: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging.

The aim of this document is to provide general information about mIBG scintigraphy in cancer patients. The guidelines describe the mIBG scintigraphy protocol currently used in clinical routine, but do not include all existing procedures for neuroendocrine tumours. The guidelines should therefore not be taken as exclusive of other nuclear medicine modalities that can be used to obtain comparable results. It is important to remember that the resources and facilities available for patient care may vary from one country to another and from one medical institution to another. The present guidelines have been prepared for nuclear medicine physicians and intend to offer assistance in optimizing the diagnostic information that can currently be obtained from mIBG scintigraphy. The corresponding guidelines of the Society of Nuclear Medicine (SNM) and the Dosimetry, Therapy and Paediatric Committee of the EANM have been taken into consideration, and partially integrated into this text. The same has been done with the most relevant literature on this topic, and the final result has been discussed within a group of distinguished experts.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy.

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

Maladies infectieuses en pratique ambulatoire (sauf sida) [Infectious diseases (beside AIDS)]

A simplified version of the US guidelines for prophylaxis of infectious endocarditis was published in 2007. Changes are expected in Switzerland as well. Posaconsole is a new antifungal agent available mostly for prophylaxis in immunocompromised patients. Epidemiology of sexually transmitted infections warrants screening in young adults and after one episode. A meta-analysis clarified the impact of antibiotic therapy in patients with Campylobacter spp. infection. In the field of emerging diseases, we discuss Norovirus epidemics, community-acquired bacteria producing extended-spectrum betalactamases, extensively resistant tuberculosis, and new respiratory viruses. Finally, we address a basic research topic that may change practice in the future: the relationship between individual susceptibility to infection and innate immunity.

Blood pressure target attainment in the background of guidelines: the very elderly in Swiss primary care.

Background There are only a few trials for the very elderly population (>79 years). No consensus, which blood pressure (BP) goals and substances should be applied, has been found yet. This survey was undertaken to investigate how octogenarians are treated and attain BP targets in the Swiss primary care. Methods Data from 4594 hypertensive patients were collected within 7 days. Eight hundred and seventy-seven patients met the requirement to be >79 years. We assessed substances/combinations and investigated pulse pressure and target blood pressure attainment (TBPA) using three different recommendations [Canadian Hypertension Education Program (CHEP), Swiss Society of Hypertension (SSH), European Society of Hypertension-European Society of Cardiology (ESH-ESC)]. Secondarily, we compared TBPA attained by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/diuretic (D), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/D and calcium channel blocker (CCB)/D with any other dual therapy and investigated whether Ds/beta-blockers (BBs) or Ds/renin angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (RAAS-Is) lead to higher TBPA. Finally, we assessed the impact of drug administration, practical work experience, location and specialization of GPs on TBPA. Results Octogenarians attained target blood pressure (TBP) between 44% (ESH-ESC) and 74% (SSH). Optimal/normal BP was reached in 22.8% of patients. Pulse pressure <65 mmHg was shown in 66.4% of patients. Monotherapy was most commonly applied followed by dual single-pill combination with ARB/D (46.5%) or ACEI/D (36.0%). No benefit in TBPA was found comparing a RAASI/D and CCB/D treatment with any other dual combination. There was also no difference between BB/D and RAAS-I/D combination therapy and between single-pill combination and dual free combinations. Conclusions GPs adhere to the use of substances proven in outcome trials and attain high TBP. No difference in meeting BP goals could be found using different drug classes. There is an unmet need to harmonize recommendations and to add additional information for the treatment of octogenarians.

Designing phase III or IV trials for vaccines: choosing between individual or cluster randomised trial designs.

The choice of design between individual randomisation, cluster or pseudo-cluster randomisation is often made difficult. Clear methodological guidelines have been given for trials in general practice, but not for vaccine trials. This article proposes a decisional flow-chart to choose the most adapted design for evaluating the effectiveness of a vaccine in large-scale studies. Six criteria have been identified: importance of herd immunity or herd protection, ability to delimit epidemiological units, homogeneity of transmission probability across sub-populations, population's acceptability of randomisation, availability of logistical resources, and estimated sample size. This easy to use decisional method could help sponsors, trial steering committees and ethical committees adopt the most suitable design.

Computerized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining therapeutic concentrations of drugs with a narrow therapeutic window is a complex task. Several computer systems have been designed to help doctors determine optimum drug dosage. Significant improvements in health care could be achieved if computer advice improved health outcomes and could be implemented in routine practice in a cost effective fashion. This is an updated version of an earlier Cochrane systematic review, by Walton et al, published in 2001. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether computerised advice on drug dosage has beneficial effects on the process or outcome of health care. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialized register (June 1996 to December 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2006), EMBASE (1980 to December 2006), hand searched the journal Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (1979 to March 2007) and the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (1996 to March 2007) as well as reference lists from primary articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series analyses of computerized advice on drug dosage were included. The participants were health professionals responsible for patient care. The outcomes were: any objectively measured change in the behaviour of the health care provider (such as changes in the dose of drug used); any change in the health of patients resulting from computerized advice (such as adverse reactions to drugs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-six comparisons (23 articles) were included (as compared to fifteen comparisons in the original review) including a wide range of drugs in inpatient and outpatient settings. Interventions usually targeted doctors although some studies attempted to influence prescriptions by pharmacists and nurses. Although all studies used reliable outcome measures, their quality was generally low. Computerized advice for drug dosage gave significant benefits by:1.increasing the initial dose (standardised mean difference 1.12, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.92)2.increasing serum concentrations (standradised mean difference 1.12, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.82)3.reducing the time to therapeutic stabilisation (standardised mean difference -0.55, 95%CI -1.03 to -0.08)4.reducing the risk of toxic drug level (rate ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.70)5.reducing the length of hospital stay (standardised mean difference -0.35, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.17). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that computerized advice for drug dosage has some benefits: it increased the initial dose of drug, increased serum drug concentrations and led to a more rapid therapeutic control. It also reduced the risk of toxic drug levels and the length of time spent in the hospital. However, it had no effect on adverse reactions. In addition, there was no evidence to suggest that some decision support technical features (such as its integration into a computer physician order entry system) or aspects of organization of care (such as the setting) could optimise the effect of computerised advice.

Paediatric oral peanut challenges: a comparison of practice in London and Western Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: There are guidelines on how to develop a food challenge protocol, but at present there is no gold standard guidance on method, and separate units produce differing protocols. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 200 patients' data from the paediatric allergy units in Lausanne and Geneva, Western Switzerland, and St Thomas' Hospital (STH), UK. RESULTS: St Thomas' Hospital has a younger cohort with a lower overall mean spIgE (2.36 kU/l vs 8.00 kU/l, P = 0.004). The target peanut protein volumes differed: Switzerland 4.4 g vs STH 8.4 g. Despite this, the dose actually achieved in positive challenges was not significantly different (2.33 g vs 1.49 g, P = 0.16). 26% of challenges reacted at 4 g or more of peanut protein. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in results highlight how the variation in reasoning behind food challenge alters the outcome. Standardization of food challenges would allow easy comparison between hospitals and geographical areas for research purposes.