Delirium: guidelines for general hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Delirium is highly prevalent in general hospitals but remains underrecognized and undertreated despite its association with increased morbidity, mortality, and health services utilization. To enhance its management, we developed guidelines covering all aspects, from risk factor identification to preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic interventions in adult patients. METHODS: Guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCT), and cohort studies were systematically searched and evaluated. Based on a synthesis of retrieved high-quality documents, recommendation items were submitted to a multidisciplinary expert panel. Experts scored the appropriateness of recommendation items, using an evidence-based, explicit, multidisciplinary panel approach. Each recommendation was graded according to this process' results. RESULTS: Rated recommendations were mostly supported by a low level of evidence (1.3% RCT and systematic reviews, 14.3% nonrandomized trials vs. 84.4% observational studies or expert opinions). Nevertheless, 71.1% of recommendations were considered appropriate by the experts. Prevention of delirium and its nonpharmacological management should be fostered. Haloperidol remains the first-choice drug, whereas the role of atypical antipsychotics is still uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: While many topics addressed in these guidelines have not yet been adequately studied, an explicit panel and evidence-based approach allowed the proposal of comprehensive recommendations for the prevention and management of delirium in general hospitals.

Appropriateness of respiratory care: evidence-based guidelines.

PRINCIPLES: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve the appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians and health service researchers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was conducted based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. 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. The recommendations were then formulated on the basis of the level of evidence in the literature and on the consensus among these experts. 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 and non-instrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of the evidence from the literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus among the 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.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes.

Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.

The updated Swiss guidelines 2016 for the treatment and follow-up of cutaneous melanoma.

Cutaneous melanoma is the most deadly cutaneous neoplasm. In order to guide treatment decisions and follow-up of melanoma patients, guidelines for the management of melanoma in Switzerland were inaugurated in 2001 and revised in 2006 and 2016. Recent data on surgical and medical treatments from randomised trials necessitated modification of the treatment and follow-up recommendations.