ESPEN Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition: intensive care.

Nutritional support in the intensive care setting represents a challenge but it is fortunate that its delivery and monitoring can be followed closely. Enteral feeding guidelines have shown the evidence in favor of early delivery and the efficacy of use of the gastrointestinal tract. Parenteral nutrition (PN) represents an alternative or additional approach when other routes are not succeeding (not necessarily having failed completely) or when it is not possible or would be unsafe to use other routes. The main goal of PN is to deliver a nutrient mixture closely related to requirements safely and to avoid complications. This nutritional approach has been a subject of debate over the past decades. PN carries the considerable risk of overfeeding which can be as deleterious as underfeeding. Therefore the authors will present not only the evidence available regarding the indications for PN, its implementation, the energy required, its possible complementary use with enteral nutrition, but also the relative importance of the macro- and micronutrients in the formula proposed for the critically ill patient. Data on long-term survival (expressed as 6 month survival) will also be considered a relevant outcome measure. Since there is a wide range of interpretations regarding the content of PN and great diversity in its practice, our guidance will necessarily reflect these different views. The papers available are very heterogeneous in quality and methodology (amount of calories, nutrients, proportion of nutrients, patients, etc.) and the different meta-analyses have not always taken this into account. Use of exclusive PN or complementary PN can lead to confusion, calorie targets are rarely achieved, and different nutrients continue to be used in different proportions. The present guidelines are the result of the analysis of the available literature, and acknowledging these limitations, our recommendations are intentionally largely expressed as expert opinions.

International consensus guidelines on the management of cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplantation.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains one of the most common infections after solid organ transplantation, resulting in significant morbidity, graft loss, and occasional mortality. Management of CMV varies considerably among transplant centers. A panel of experts on CMV and solid organ transplant was convened by The Infectious Diseases Section of The Transplantation Society to develop evidence and expert opinion-based consensus guidelines on CMV management including diagnostics, immunology, prevention, treatment, drug resistance, and pediatric issues.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals; effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting the doctor to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes of care (related to healthcare professionals' practice) and outcomes of care (related to patients' health condition). SEARCH METHODS: For this update the EPOC Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the following databases between June 11-19, 2012: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Library (Economics, Methods, and Health Technology Assessment sections), Issue 6, 2012; MEDLINE, OVID (1946- ), Daily Update, and In-process; EMBASE, Ovid (1947- ); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980- ); EPOC Specialised Register, Reference Manager, and INSPEC, Engineering Village. The authors reviewed reference lists of related reviews and studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included individual or cluster-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes and/or outcomes of care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. We contacted authors to obtain important missing information for studies that were published within the last 10 years. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median absolute improvement and interquartile range (IQR) in process adherence across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. MAIN RESULTS: In the 32 included studies, computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieved moderate improvement in professional practices, with a median improvement of processes of care of 7.0% (IQR: 3.9% to 16.4%). Implementing reminders alone improved care by 11.2% (IQR 6.5% to 19.6%) compared with usual care, while implementing reminders in addition to another intervention improved care by 4.0% only (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%) compared with the other intervention. The quality of evidence for these comparisons was rated as moderate according to the GRADE approach. Two reminder features were associated with larger effect sizes: providing space on the reminder for provider to enter a response (median 13.7% versus 4.3% for no response, P value = 0.01) and providing an explanation of the content or advice on the reminder (median 12.0% versus 4.2% for no explanation, P value = 0.02). Median improvement in processes of care also differed according to the behaviour the reminder targeted: for instance, reminders to vaccinate improved processes of care by 13.1% (IQR 12.2% to 20.7%) compared with other targeted behaviours. In the only study that had sufficient power to detect a clinically significant effect on outcomes of care, reminders were not associated with significant improvements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate quality evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieve moderate improvement in process of care. Two characteristics emerged as significant predictors of improvement: providing space on the reminder for a response from the clinician and providing an explanation of the reminder's content or advice. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can improve care in various settings under various conditions.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-critically ill patients: a prospective evaluation of current practice in a general surgery department

Objective: There is little evidence regarding the benefit of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) outside critical care setting. Over-prescription of SUP is not devoid of risks. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for SUP in a general surgery department.Methods: Data collection was performed prospectively during an 8-week period on patients hospitalized in a general surgery department (58 beds) by pharmacists. Patients with a PPI prescription for the treatment of ulcers, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, oesophagitis or epigastric pain were excluded. Patients admitted twice during the study period were not re-included. The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guidelines on SUP were used to assess the appropriateness of de novo PPI prescriptions.Results: Among 255 consecutive patients in the study, 138 (54%) received a prophylaxis with PPI, of which 86 (62%) were de novo PPI prescriptions. One-hundred twenty-nine patients (94%) received esomeprazole (according to the hospital drug policy). The most frequent dosage was 40 mg/day. Use of PPI for SUP was evaluated in 67 patients. Fifty-three patients (79%) had no risk factors for SUP. Twelve and 2 patients had one or two risk factors, respectively. At discharge, PPI prophylaxis was continued in 34% of patients with a de novo PPI prescription.Conclusion: This study highlights the overuse of PPIs in non-ICU patients and the inappropriate continuation of PPI prescriptions at discharge.Treatment

Place de la clinique en médecine ambulatoire--les enseignements de l'etude TOPIC [The place of the clinic in primary case--the TOPIC study].

We know very little about the importance of history and physical examination compared to the importance of paraclinical tests in the diagnostic process in primary care. To answer this question, we examined prospectively 672 consecutive patients with chest pain in primary care. We recorded the timing and the clinical characteristics of the most frequent diagnosis. The resort to laboratory or other clinical tests and reference to specialist were influenced by: emergency consultation, potentially life-threatening aetiology, personal characteristics of the general practitioners' (GP) and patients' anxiety. GPs attributed the diagnosis to history and physical examination alone in 66% and to the association of history, physical examination and tests in 31% cases. This, clinical strategy remains the most important factor in the diagnostic process; even when they are insufficient, they allowed to generate hypotheses and guide investigations.

Implementation of raltegravir in routine clinical practice: selection criteria for choosing this drug, virologic response rates, and characteristics of failures.

BACKGROUND: Raltegravir (RAL) achieved remarkable virologic suppression rates in randomized-clinical trials, but today efficacy data and factors for treatment failures in a routine clinical care setting are limited. METHODS: First, factors associated with a switch to RAL were identified with a logistic regression including patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study with a history of 3 class failure (n = 423). Second, predictors for virologic outcome were identified in an intent-to-treat analysis including all patients who received RAL. Last observation carried forward imputation was used to determine week 24 response rate (HIV-1 RNA >or= 50 copies/mL). RESULTS: The predominant factor associated with a switch to RAL in patients with suppressed baseline RNA was a regimen containing enfuvirtide [odds ratio 41.9 (95% confidence interval: 11.6-151.6)]. Efficacy analysis showed an overall response rate of 80.9% (152/188), whereas 71.8% (84/117) and 95.8% (68/71) showed viral suppression when stratified for detectable and undetectable RNA at baseline, respectively. Overall CD4 cell counts increased significantly by 42 cells/microL (P < 0.001). Characteristics of failures were a genotypic sensitivity score of the background regimen <or=1, very low RAL plasma concentrations, poor adherence, and high viral load at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Virologic suppression rates in our routine clinical care setting were promising and comparable with data from previously published randomized-controlled trials.

Comment tes médecins de famille prennent-ils en charge l'hypothyroïdie infraclinique [How do Swiss family physicians treat subclinical hypothyroidism?].

L'hypothyroïdie infraclinique est fréquemment rencontrée et sa prévalence augmente avec l'âge. Les recommandations relatives au dépistage et au traitement de l'hypothyroïdie infraclinique sont controversées. Une enquête internationale auprès des médecins de famille, à laquelle la Suisse a participé, a mis en évidence de fortes variations dans la prise en charge de l'hypothyroïdie infraclinique entre les pays. Ces différences de traitement traduisent avant tout le manque de données fiables quant à la prise en charge de cette condition. L'essai clinique randomisé européen TRUST devrait permettre de clarifier les indications pour le dépistage et la substitution par thyroxine. Une collaboration avec les médecins de famille et le soutien des Instituts universitaires de médecine générale à Lausanne et à Berne pour le recrutement des patients devraient permettre d'obtenir des données directement applicables à une population représentative de la médecine ambulatoire. Subclinical hypothyroidism is a common condition, and its prevalence increases with age. Currently, guidelines regarding the screening and treatment of subclinical hypothyroidism are controversial. An international survey of general practitioners (GPs), to which Swiss GPs also contributed, showed large inter-country variations in treatment strategies for subclinical hypothyroidism. These differences are mainly explained by the lack of strong evidence for the management of this condition. The European randomized-controlled clinical trial TRUST should help clarify recommendations for screening and thyroxin replacement for the elderly with subclinical hypothyroidism. Working in close collaboration with GPs in Switzerland for the recruitment of patients will ensure that the findings from this study will be applicable to primary care settings.

Traitements de fer: preuves de t'efficacité et bonne pratique clinique [Iron therapy: proof of efficacy and good clinical practice].

Efficacy of iron therapy, whether oral or intravenous, on biological markers of body iron stores is well recognized in medical literature, but current studies are heterogeneous, of sometimes dubious quality, and rarely address clinical outcomes. Precise practical guidelines appear available only for indications related to kidney disease. First-line intravenous use is reserved for situations comprising chronic renal failure, or patients presenting with malabsorption syndromes such as in inflammatory bowel disease. In all other situations, because of the non-negligible risk of hypersensitivity reactions, intravenous iron use is considered justified only in clinically sustained indications, for patients in whom oral administration of iron is unsatisfactory or impossible.

Lecture d'articles médicaux: quelques pièges à éviter [Reading medical articles--what pitfalls to avoid]

Critical reading and careful interpretation of results of the medical literature is a difficult task for primary care physicians. Being aware of common potential pitfalls that may bias results of a study is helpful. Among common pitfalls, odds ratios are often interpreted as relative risks, which overestimate the impact of a risk factor. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of a new drug or a new target disease often use surrogate markers instead of clinical events as outcomes. Results of these trials should be considered with caution before using their results for clinical practice. For screening, observational studies often yield potentially biased or conflicting results. As clinical guidelines and expert opinions are often conflicting, primary care physicians should wait for results of large clinical trials in clinical events before changing their practice for screening or new drugs.

Les bonnes pratiques dompteront-elles la recherche clinique [Will good clinical practice domesticate human research?]

During recent years, an increasingly comprehensive set of rules and guidelines has been developed around clinical trials, to ensure their proper ethical, methodological, administrative and financial conduct. While initially limited to new drug development, this regulation is progressively invading all areas of clinical research, with limited respect for the heterogeneity in aims, resources, sponsors and epistemological grounds. No clinical study should be planned without consideration of a series of legal requirements, which are reviewed. Concerns about their practical implications are critically assessed.

ESPEN Guidelines on Enteral Nutrition: Intensive care.

Enteral nutrition (EN) via tube feeding is, today, the preferred way of feeding the critically ill patient and an important means of counteracting for the catabolic state induced by severe diseases. These guidelines are intended to give evidence-based recommendations for the use of EN in patients who have a complicated course during their ICU stay, focusing particularly on those who develop a severe inflammatory response, i.e. patients who have failure of at least one organ during their ICU stay. These guidelines were developed by an interdisciplinary expert group in accordance with officially accepted standards and are based on all relevant publications since 1985. They were discussed and accepted in a consensus conference. EN should be given to all ICU patients who are not expected to be taking a full oral diet within three days. It should have begun during the first 24h using a standard high-protein formula. During the acute and initial phases of critical illness an exogenous energy supply in excess of 20-25 kcal/kg BW/day should be avoided, whereas, during recovery, the aim should be to provide values of 25-30 total kcal/kg BW/day. Supplementary parenteral nutrition remains a reserve tool and should be given only to those patients who do not reach their target nutrient intake on EN alone. There is no general indication for immune-modulating formulae in patients with severe illness or sepsis and an APACHE II Score >15. Glutamine should be supplemented in patients suffering from burns or trauma.

ESH-ESC guidelines for the management of hypertension.

The following is a brief statement of the 2003 European Society of Hypertension (ESH)-European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension.The continuous relationship between the level of blood pressure and cardiovascular risk makes the definition of hypertension arbitrary. Since risk factors cluster in hypertensive individuals, risk stratification should be made and decision about the management should not be based on blood pressure alone, but also according to the presence or absence of other risk factors, target organ damage, diabetes, and cardiovascular or renal damage, as well as on other aspects of the patient's personal, medical and social situation. Blood pressure values measured in the doctor's office or the clinic should commonly be used as reference. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring may have clinical value, when considerable variability of office blood pressure is found over the same or different visits, high office blood pressure is measured in subjects otherwise at low global cardiovascular risk, there is marked discrepancy between blood pressure values measured in the office and at home, resistance to drug treatment is suspected, or research is involved. Secondary hypertension should always be investigated.The primary goal of treatment of patient with high blood pressure is to achieve the maximum reduction in long-term total risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. This requires treatment of all the reversible factors identified, including smoking, dislipidemia, or diabetes, and the appropriate management of associated clinical conditions, as well as treatment of the raised blood pressure per se. On the basis of current evidence from trials, it can be recommended that blood pressure, both systolic and diastolic, be intensively lowered at least below 140/90 mmHg and to definitely lower values, if tolerated, in all hypertensive patients, and below 130/80 mmHg in diabetics.Lifestyle measures should be instituted whenever appropriate in all patients, including subjects with high normal blood pressure and patients who require drug treatment. The purpose is to lower blood pressure and to control other risk factors and clinical conditions present.In most, if not all, hypertensive patients, therapy should be started gradually, and target blood pressure achieved progressively through several weeks. To reach target blood pressure, it is likely that a large proportion of patients will require combination therapy with more than one agent. The main benefits of antihypertensive therapy are due to lowering of blood pressure per se. There is also evidence that specific drug classes may differ in some effect or in special groups of patients. The choice of drugs will be influenced by many factors, including previous experience of the patient with antihypertensive agents, cost of drugs, risk profile, presence or absence of target organ damage, clinical cardiovascular or renal disease or diabetes, patient's preference.

Current cardiovascular risk management patterns with special focus on lipid lowering in daily practice in Switzerland.

Background: There may be a considerable gap between LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and blood pressure (BP) goal values recommended by the guidelines and results achieved in daily practice. Design Prospective cross-sectional survey of cardiovascular disease risk profiles and management with focus on lipid lowering and BP lowering in clinical practice. Methods: In phase 1, the cardiovascular risk of patients with known lipid profile visiting their general practitioner was anonymously assessed in accordance to the PROCAM-score. In phase 2, high-risk patients who did not achieve LDL-C goal less than 2.6 mmol/l in phase 1 could be further documented. Results: Six hundred thirty-five general practitioners collected the data of 23 892 patients with known lipid profile. Forty percent were high-risk patients (diabetes mellitus or coronary heart disease or PROCAM-score >20%), compared with 27% estimated by the physicians. Goal attainment rate was almost double for BP than for LDL-C in high-risk patients (62 vs. 37%). Both goals were attained by 25%. LDL-C values in phase 1 and 2 were available for 3097 high-risk patients not at LDL-C goal in phase 1; 32% of patients achieved LDL-C goal of less than 2.6 mmol/l after a mean of 17 weeks. The most successful strategies for LDL-C reduction were implemented in only 22% of the high-risk patients. Conclusion: Although patients at high cardiovascular risk were treated more intensively than low or medium risk patients, the majority remained insufficiently controlled, which is an incentive for intensified medical education. Adequate implementation of Swiss and International guidelines would expectedly contribute to improved achievement of LDL-C and BP goal values in daily practice.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-critically ill patients: a prospective evaluation of current practice in a general surgery department.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: There is little evidence regarding the benefit of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) outside a critical care setting. Overprescription of SUP is not devoid of risks. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for SUP in a general surgery department. METHOD: Data collection was performed prospectively during an 8-week period on patients hospitalized in a general surgery department (58 beds) by pharmacists. Patients with a PPI prescription for the treatment of ulcers, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, oesophagitis or epigastric pain were excluded. Patients admitted twice during the study period were not reincluded. The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guidelines on SUP were used to assess the appropriateness of de novo PPI prescriptions. RESULTS: Among 255 patients in the study, 138 (54%) received a prophylaxis with PPI, of which 86 (62%) were de novo PPI prescriptions. A total of 129 patients (94%) received esomeprazole (according to the hospital drug policy). The most frequent dosage was at 40 mg once daily. Use of PPI for SUP was evaluated in 67 patients. A total of 53 patients (79%) had no risk factors for SUP. Twelve and two patients had one or two risk factors, respectively. At discharge, PPI prophylaxis was continued in 33% of patients with a de novo PPI prescription. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the overuse of PPIs in non-intensive care unit patients and the inappropriate continuation of PPI prescriptions at discharge. Treatment recommendations for SUP are needed to restrict PPI use for justified indications.