Das GRADE-System: ein internationaler Ansatz zur Vereinheitlichung der Graduierung von Evidenz und Empfehlungen in Leitlinien. [The GRADE System: an international approach to standardize the graduation of evidence and recommendations in guidelines]

Clinical practice guidelines have become an important source of information to support clinicians in the management of individual patients. However, current guideline methods have limitations that include the lack of separating the quality of evidence from the strength of recommendations. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group, an international collaboration of guideline developers, methodologists, and clinicians have developed a system that addresses these shortcomings. Core elements include transparent methodology for grading the quality of evidence, the distinction between quality of the evidence and strength of a recommendation, an explicit balancing of benefits and harms of health care interventions, an explicit recognition of the values and preferences that underlie recommendations. The GRADE system has been piloted in various practice settings to ensure that it captures the complexity involved in evidence assessment and grading recommendations while maintaining simplicity and practicality. Many guideline organizations and medical societies have endorsed the system and adopted it for their guideline processes.

New Algorithm for Managing Childhood Illness Using Mobile Technology (ALMANACH): A Controlled Non-Inferiority Study on Clinical Outcome and Antibiotic Use in Tanzania.

INTRODUCTION: The decline of malaria and scale-up of rapid diagnostic tests calls for a revision of IMCI. A new algorithm (ALMANACH) running on mobile technology was developed based on the latest evidence. The objective was to ensure that ALMANACH was safe, while keeping a low rate of antibiotic prescription. METHODS: Consecutive children aged 2-59 months with acute illness were managed using ALMANACH (2 intervention facilities), or standard practice (2 control facilities) in Tanzania. Primary outcomes were proportion of children cured at day 7 and who received antibiotics on day 0. RESULTS: 130/842 (15∙4%) in ALMANACH and 241/623 (38∙7%) in control arm were diagnosed with an infection in need for antibiotic, while 3∙8% and 9∙6% had malaria. 815/838 (97∙3%;96∙1-98.4%) were cured at D7 using ALMANACH versus 573/623 (92∙0%;89∙8-94∙1%) using standard practice (p<0∙001). Of 23 children not cured at D7 using ALMANACH, 44% had skin problems, 30% pneumonia, 26% upper respiratory infection and 13% likely viral infection at D0. Secondary hospitalization occurred for one child using ALMANACH and one who eventually died using standard practice. At D0, antibiotics were prescribed to 15∙4% (12∙9-17∙9%) using ALMANACH versus 84∙3% (81∙4-87∙1%) using standard practice (p<0∙001). 2∙3% (1∙3-3.3) versus 3∙2% (1∙8-4∙6%) received an antibiotic secondarily. CONCLUSION: Management of children using ALMANACH improve clinical outcome and reduce antibiotic prescription by 80%. This was achieved through more accurate diagnoses and hence better identification of children in need of antibiotic treatment or not. The building on mobile technology allows easy access and rapid update of the decision chart. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201011000262218.