Ideal and reality: do countries adopt and follow recommended procedures in comprehensive multiyear planning guidelines for national immunization programmes?

BACKGROUND: Meticulous steps and procedures are proposed in planning guidelines for the development of comprehensive multiyear plans for national immunization programmes. However, we know very little about whether the real-life experience of those who adopt these guidelines involves following these procedures as expected. Are these steps and procedures followed in practice? We examined the adoption and usage of the guidelines in planning national immunization programmes and assessed whether the recommendations in these guidelines are applied as consistently as intended. METHODS: We gathered information from the national comprehensive multiyear plans developed by 77 low-income countries. For each of the 11 components, we examined how each country applied the four recommended steps of situation analysis, problem prioritization, selection of interventions, and selection of indicators. We then conducted an analysis to determine the patterns of alignment of the comprehensive multiyear plans with those four recommended planning steps. RESULTS: Within the first 3 years following publication of the guidelines, 66 (86%) countries used the tool to develop their comprehensive multiyear plans. The funding conditions attached to the use of these guidelines appeared to influence their rapid adoption and usage. Overall, only 33 (43%) countries fully applied all four recommended planning steps of the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption and usage of the guidelines for the development of comprehensive multiyear plans for national immunization programmes were rapid. However, our findings show substantial variation between the proposed planning ideals set out in the guidelines and actual use in practice. A better understanding of factors that influence how recommendations in public health guidelines are applied in practice could contribute to improvements in guidelines design. It could also help adjust strategies used to introduce them into public health programmes, with the ultimate goal of a greater health impact.

Capturing diagnosis-timing in ICD-coded hospital data: recommendations from the WHO ICD-11 topic advisory group on quality and safety.

PURPOSE: To develop a consensus opinion regarding capturing diagnosis-timing in coded hospital data. METHODS: As part of the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases-11th Revision initiative, the Quality and Safety Topic Advisory Group is charged with enhancing the capture of quality and patient safety information in morbidity data sets. One such feature is a diagnosis-timing flag. The Group has undertaken a narrative literature review, scanned national experiences focusing on countries currently using timing flags, and held a series of meetings to derive formal recommendations regarding diagnosis-timing reporting. RESULTS: The completeness of diagnosis-timing reporting continues to improve with experience and use; studies indicate that it enhances risk-adjustment and may have a substantial impact on hospital performance estimates, especially for conditions/procedures that involve acutely ill patients. However, studies suggest that its reliability varies, is better for surgical than medical patients (kappa in hip fracture patients of 0.7-1.0 versus kappa in pneumonia of 0.2-0.6) and is dependent on coder training and setting. It may allow simpler and more precise specification of quality indicators. CONCLUSIONS: As the evidence indicates that a diagnosis-timing flag improves the ability of routinely collected, coded hospital data to support outcomes research and the development of quality and safety indicators, the Group recommends that a classification of 'arising after admission' (yes/no), with permitted designations of 'unknown or clinically undetermined', will facilitate coding while providing flexibility when there is uncertainty. Clear coding standards and guidelines with ongoing coder education will be necessary to ensure reliability of the diagnosis-timing flag.

European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guidelines for the management of temperature in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Hyperthermia is a frequent complication in patients with acute ischemic stroke. On the other hand, therapeutically induced hypothermia has shown promising potential in animal models of focal cerebral ischemia. This Guideline Document presents the European Stroke Organisation guidelines for the management of temperature in patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group identified related questions and developed its recommendations based on evidence from randomized controlled trials elaborating the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. This Guideline Document was reviewed within the European Stroke Organisation and externally and was approved by the European Stroke Organisation Guidelines Committee and the European Stroke Organisation Executive Committee. RESULTS: We found low-quality evidence, and therefore, we cannot make any recommendation for treating hyperthermia as a means to improve functional outcome and/or survival in patients with acute ischemic stroke and hyperthermia; moderate evidence to suggest against routine prevention of hyperthermia with antipyretics as a means to improve functional outcome and/or survival in patients with acute ischemic stroke and normothermia; very low-quality evidence to suggest against routine induction of hypothermia as a means to improve functional outcome and/or survival in patients with acute ischemic stroke. CONCLUSIONS: The currently available data about the management of temperature in patients with acute ischemic stroke are limited, and the strengths of the recommendations are therefore weak. We call for new randomized controlled trials as well as recruitment of eligible patients to ongoing randomized controlled trials to allow for better-informed recommendations in the future.

Thoracoscopic resection of pulmonary metastasis: Current practice and results.

NlmCategory="UNASSIGNED">Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is currently a routinely performed procedure for the management of early non small cell lung cancer. The oncological results of VATS in terms of local recurrence and overall survival are equivalent or superior to those of conventional thoracotomy with lower morbidity and hospital stay. In the field of pulmonary metastasectomy, current guidelines support a thoracotomy approach in order to properly palpate the lung and detect nodules too small to be identified on standard radiological examinations (typically less than 5mm in diameter). However, the oncological and clinical significance of these millimetric nodules is not known. This has led some thoracic surgeons to rethink the approach of solitary pulmonary metastasectomy: because of improvements in thin slice helical CT-scans, some support a VATS approach for solitary pulmonary nodules without formal bimanual palpation and suggest this allows equivalent oncological results and decreased surgical morbidity.

Practice variability and efficacy of clonazepam, lorazepam, and midazolam in status epilepticus: A multicenter comparison.

OBJECTIVE: Benzodiazepines (BZD) are recommended as first-line treatment for status epilepticus (SE), with lorazepam (LZP) and midazolam (MDZ) being the most widely used drugs and part of current treatment guidelines. Clonazepam (CLZ) is also utilized in many countries; however, there is no systematic comparison of these agents for treatment of SE to date. METHODS: We identified all patients treated with CLZ, LZP, or MDZ as a first-line agent from a prospectively collected observational cohort of adult patients treated for SE in four tertiary care centers. Relative efficacies of CLZ, LZP, and MDZ were compared by assessing the risk of developing refractory SE and the number of antiseizure drugs (ASDs) required to control SE. RESULTS: Among 177 patients, 72 patients (40.62%) received CLZ, 82 patients (46.33%) LZP, and 23 (12.99%) MDZ; groups were similar in demographics and SE characteristics. Loading dose was considered insufficient in the majority of cases for LZP, with a similar rate (84%, 95%, and 87.5%) in the centers involved, and CLZ was used as recommended in 52% of patients. After adjustment for relevant variables, LZP was associated with an increased risk of refractoriness as compared to CLZ (odds ratio [OR] 6.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.66-15.5) and with an increased number of ASDs needed for SE control (OR 4.35, 95% CI 1.8-10.49). SIGNIFICANCE: CLZ seems to be an effective alternative to LZP and MDZ. LZP is frequently underdosed in this setting. These findings are highly relevant, since they may impact daily practice.

Diagnosis and treatment of primary CNS lymphoma in immunocompetent patients: guidelines from the European Association for Neuro-Oncology.

The management of primary CNS lymphoma is one of the most controversial topics in neuro-oncology because of the complexity of the disease and the very few controlled studies available. In 2013, the European Association of Neuro-Oncology created a multidisciplinary task force to establish evidence-based guidelines for immunocompetent adults with primary CNS lymphoma. In this Review, we present these guidelines, which provide consensus considerations and recommendations for diagnosis, assessment, staging, and treatment of primary CNS lymphoma. Specifically, we address aspects of care related to surgery, systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy, intensive chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, radiotherapy, intraocular manifestations, and management of elderly patients. The guidelines should aid clinicians in their daily practice and decision making, and serve as a basis for future investigations in neuro-oncology.

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are essential in implementing and maintaining nationwide stage-specific diagnostic and therapeutic standards. In 2011, the first German expert consensus guideline defined the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of early and locally advanced esophagogastric cancers. Here, we compare this guideline with other national guidelines as well as current literature. METHODS: The German S3-guideline used an approved development process with de novo literature research, international guideline adaptation, or good clinical practice. Other recent evidence-based national guidelines and current references were compared with German recommendations. RESULTS: In the German S3 and other Western guidelines, adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) are classified according to formerly defined AEG I-III subgroups due to the high surgical impact. To stage local disease, computed tomography of the chest and abdomen and endosonography are reinforced. In contrast, laparoscopy is optional for staging. Mucosal cancers (T1a) should be endoscopically resected "en-bloc" to allow complete histological evaluation of lateral and basal margins. For locally advanced cancers of the stomach or esophagogastric junction (≥T3N+), preferred treatment is preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy. Preoperative radiochemotherapy is an evidence-based alternative for large AEG type I-II tumors (≥T3N+). Additionally, some experts recommend treating T2 tumors with a similar approach, mainly because pretherapeutic staging is often considered to be unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: The German S3 guideline represents an up-to-date European position with regard to diagnosis, staging, and treatment recommendations for patients with locally advanced esophagogastric cancer. Effects of perioperative chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy are still to be investigated for adenocarcinoma of the cardia and the lower esophagus.

Variation in Current Management of Term and Late-preterm Neonates at Risk for Early-onset Sepsis: An International Survey and Review of Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty about the presence of infection results in unnecessary and prolonged empiric antibiotic treatment of newborns at risk for early-onset sepsis (EOS). This study evaluates the impact of this uncertainty on the diversity in management. METHODS: A web-based survey with questions addressing management of infection risk-adjusted scenarios was performed in Europe, North America, and Australia. Published national guidelines (n = 5) were reviewed and compared with the results of the survey. RESULTS: 439 Clinicians (68% were neonatologists) from 16 countries completed the survey. In the low-risk scenario, 29% would start antibiotic therapy and 26% would not, both groups without laboratory investigations; 45% would start if laboratory markers were abnormal. In the high-risk scenario, 99% would start antibiotic therapy. In the low-risk scenario, 89% would discontinue antibiotic therapy before 72 hours. In the high-risk scenario, 35% would discontinue therapy before 72 hours, 56% would continue therapy for 5-7 days, and 9% for more than 7 days. Laboratory investigations were used in 31% of scenarios for the decision to start, and in 72% for the decision to discontinue antibiotic treatment. National guidelines differ considerably regarding the decision to start in low-risk and regarding the decision to continue therapy in higher risk situations. CONCLUSIONS: There is a broad diversity of clinical practice in management of EOS and a lack of agreement between current guidelines. The results of the survey reflect the diversity of national guidelines. Prospective studies regarding management of neonates at risk of EOS with safety endpoints are needed.