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.

Systematic review of evidence and consensus on diverticulitis: an analysis of national and international guidelines.

AIM: The study aimed to analyse the currently available national and international guidelines for areas of consensus and contrasting recommendations in the treatment of diverticulitis and thereby to design questions for future research. METHOD: MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed were systematically searched for guidelines on diverticular disease and diverticulitis. Inclusion was confined to papers in English and those < 10 years old. The included topics were classified as consensus or controversy between guidelines, and the highest level of evidence was scored as sufficient (Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine Level of Evidence of 3a or higher) or insufficient. RESULTS: Six guidelines were included and all topics with recommendations were compared. Overall, in 13 topics consensus was reached and 10 topics were regarded as controversial. In five topics, consensus was reached without sufficient evidence and in three topics there was no evidence and no consensus. Clinical staging, the need for intraluminal imaging, dietary restriction, duration of antibiotic treatment, the protocol for abscess treatment, the need for elective surgery in subgroups of patients, the need for surgery after abscess treatment and the level of the proximal resection margin all lack consensus or evidence. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of diverticular disease and diverticulitis ranged from nonexistent to strong, regardless of consensus. The most relevant research questions were identified and proposed as topics for future research.

Traitement pharmacologique de la schizophrénie: évaluation comparative de la qualité des recommandations de pratique clinique [Comparative evaluation of clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of schizophrenia]

INTRODUCTION: Many clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been published in reply to the development of the concept of "evidence-based medicine" (EBM) and as a solution to the difficulty of synthesizing and selecting relevant medical literature. Taking into account the expansion of new CPG, the question of choice arises: which CPG to consider in a given clinical situation? It is of primary importance to evaluate the quality of the CPG, but until recently, there has been no standardized tool of evaluation or comparison of the quality of the CPG. An instrument of evaluation of the quality of the CPG, called "AGREE" for appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation was validated in 2002. AIM OF THE STUDY: The six principal CPG concerning the treatment of schizophrenia are compared with the help of the "AGREE" instrument: (1) "the Agence nationale pour le développement de l'évaluation médicale (ANDEM) recommendations"; (2) "The American Psychiatric Association (APA) practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia"; (3) "The quick reference guide of APA practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia"; (4) "The schizophrenia patient outcomes research team (PORT) treatment recommendations"; (5) "The Texas medication algorithm project (T-MAP)" and (6) "The expert consensus guideline for the treatment of schizophrenia". RESULTS: The results of our study were then compared with those of a similar investigation published in 2005, structured on 24 CPG tackling the treatment of schizophrenia. The "AGREE" tool was also used by two investigators in their study. In general, the scores of the two studies differed little and the two global evaluations of the CPG converged; however, each of the six CPG is perfectible. DISCUSSION: The rigour of elaboration of the six CPG was in general average. The consideration of the opinion of potential users was incomplete, and an effort made in the presentation of the recommendations would facilitate their clinical use. Moreover, there was little consideration by the authors regarding the applicability of the recommendations. CONCLUSION: Globally, two CPG are considered as strongly recommended: "the quick reference guide of the APA practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia" and "the T-MAP".

Linee guida della consensus conference dell'ANGP per il monitoraggio plasmatico dei farmaci (TDM) in psichiatria. Aggiornamento 2011 =AGNP consensus guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring in psychiatry: update 2011

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), i.e., the quantification of serum or plasma concentrations of medications for dose optimization, has proven a valuable tool for the patient-matched psychopharmacotherapy. Uncertain drug adherence, suboptimal tolerability, non-response at therapeutic doses, or pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions are typical situations when measurement of medication concentrations is helpful. Patient populations that may predominantly benefit from TDM in psychiatry are children, pregnant women, elderly patients, individuals with intelligence disabilities, forensic patients, patients with known or suspected genetically determined pharmacokinetic abnormalities or individuals with pharmacokinetically relevant comorbidities. However, the potential benefits of TDM for optimization of pharmacotherapy can only be obtained if the method is adequately integrated into the clinical treatment process. To promote an appropriate use of TDM, the TDM expert group of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Neuropsychopharmakologie und Pharmakopsychiatrie (AGNP) issued guidelines for TDM in psychiatry in 2004. Since then, knowledge has advanced significantly, and new psychopharmacologic agents have been introduced that are also candidates for TDM. Therefore the TDM consensus guidelines were updated and extended to 128 neuropsychiatric drugs. 4 levels of recommendation for using TDM were defined ranging from "strongly recommended" to "potentially useful". Evidence-based "therapeutic reference ranges" and "dose related reference ranges" were elaborated after an extensive literature search and a structured internal review process. A "laboratory alert level" was introduced, i.e., a plasma level at or above which the laboratory should immediately inform the treating physician. Supportive information such as cytochrome P450 substrateand inhibitor properties of medications, normal ranges of ratios of concentrations of drug metabolite to parent drug and recommendations for the interpretative services are given. Recommendations when to combine TDM with pharmacogenetic tests are also provided. Following the guidelines will help to improve the outcomes of psychopharmacotherapy of many patients especially in case of pharmacokinetic problems. Thereby, one should never forget that TDM is an interdisciplinary task that sometimes requires the respectful discussion of apparently discrepant data so that, ultimately, the patient can profit from such a joint effort.

EFNS guidelines on the clinical management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (MALS)--revised report of an EFNS task force.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for the diagnosis and management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is weak. OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence-based or expert recommendations for the diagnosis and management of ALS based on a literature search and the consensus of an expert panel. METHODS: All available medical reference systems were searched, and original papers, meta-analyses, review papers, book chapters and guidelines recommendations were reviewed. The final literature search was performed in February 2011. Recommendations were reached by consensus. RECOMMENDATIONS: Patients with symptoms suggestive of ALS should be assessed as soon as possible by an experienced neurologist. Early diagnosis should be pursued, and investigations, including neurophysiology, performed with a high priority. The patient should be informed of the diagnosis by a consultant with a good knowledge of the patient and the disease. Following diagnosis, the patient and relatives/carers should receive regular support from a multidisciplinary care team. Medication with riluzole should be initiated as early as possible. Control of symptoms such as sialorrhoea, thick mucus, emotional lability, cramps, spasticity and pain should be attempted. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding improves nutrition and quality of life, and gastrostomy tubes should be placed before respiratory insufficiency develops. Non-invasive positive-pressure ventilation also improves survival and quality of life. Maintaining the patient's ability to communicate is essential. During the entire course of the disease, every effort should be made to maintain patient autonomy. Advance directives for palliative end-of-life care should be discussed early with the patient and carers, respecting the patient's social and cultural background.

Consensus guidelines for enhanced recovery after gastrectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Application of evidence-based perioperative care protocols reduces complication rates, accelerates recovery and shortens hospital stay. Presently, there are no comprehensive guidelines for perioperative care for gastrectomy. METHODS: An international working group within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society assembled an evidence-based comprehensive framework for optimal perioperative care for patients undergoing gastrectomy. Data were retrieved from standard databases and personal archives. Evidence and recommendations were classified according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system and were discussed until consensus was reached within the group. The quality of evidence was rated 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low'. Recommendations were graded as 'strong' or 'weak'. RESULTS: The available evidence has been summarized and recommendations are given for 25 items, eight of which contain procedure-specific evidence. The quality of evidence varies substantially and further research is needed for many issues to improve the strength of evidence and grade of recommendations. CONCLUSION: The present evidence-based framework provides comprehensive advice on optimal perioperative care for the patient undergoing gastrectomy and facilitates multi-institutional prospective cohort registries and adequately powered randomized trials for further research.

European guidelines for sclerotherapy in chronic venous disorders.

AIM: Sclerotherapy is the targeted chemical ablation of varicose veins by intravenous injection of a liquid or foamed sclerosing drug. The treated veins may be intradermal, subcutaneous, and/or transfascial as well as superficial and deep in venous malformations. The aim of this guideline is to give evidence-based recommendations for liquid and foam sclerotherapy. METHODS: This guideline was drafted on behalf of 23 European Phlebological Societies during a Guideline Conference on 7-10 May 2012 in Mainz. The conference was organized by the German Society of Phlebology. These guidelines review the present state of knowledge as reflected in published medical literature. The regulatory situation of sclerosant drugs differs from country to country but this has not been considered in this document. The recommendations of this guideline are graded according to the American College of Chest Physicians Task Force recommendations on Grading Strength of Recommendations and Quality of Evidence in Clinical Guidelines. RESULTS: This guideline focuses on the two sclerosing drugs which are licensed in the majority of the European countries, polidocanol and sodium tetradecyl sulphate. Other sclerosants are not discussed in detail. The guideline gives recommendations concerning indications, contraindications, side-effects, concentrations, volumes, technique and efficacy of liquid and foam sclerotherapy of varicose veins and venous malformations.

EAACI Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Guidelines: diagnosis and management of food allergy.

Food allergy can result in considerable morbidity, impact negatively on quality of life, and prove costly in terms of medical care. These guidelines have been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Guidelines for Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Group, building on previous EAACI position papers on adverse reaction to foods and three recent systematic reviews on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of food allergy, and provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of food allergy. While the primary audience is allergists, this document is relevant for all other healthcare professionals, including primary care physicians, and pediatric and adult specialists, dieticians, pharmacists and paramedics. Our current understanding of the manifestations of food allergy, the role of diagnostic tests, and the effective management of patients of all ages with food allergy is presented. The acute management of non-life-threatening reactions is covered in these guidelines, but for guidance on the emergency management of anaphylaxis, readers are referred to the related EAACI Anaphylaxis Guidelines.

Fourth European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL-4): guidelines for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of invasive fungal diseases in paediatric patients with cancer or allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation.

Invasive opportunistic fungal diseases (IFDs) are important causes of morbidity and mortality in paediatric patients with cancer and those who have had an allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). Apart from differences in underlying disorders and comorbidities relative to those of adults, IFDs in infants, children, and adolescents are unique with respect to their epidemiology, the usefulness of diagnostic methods, the pharmacology and dosing of antifungal agents, and the absence of interventional phase 3 clinical trials for guidance of evidence-based decisions. To better define the state of knowledge on IFDs in paediatric patients with cancer and allogeneic HSCT and to improve IFD diagnosis, prevention, and management, the Fourth European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL-4) in 2011 convened a group that reviewed the scientific literature on IFDs and graded the available quality of evidence according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America grading system. The final considerations and recommendations of the group are summarised in this manuscript.

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.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colonic Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colonic surgery and to provide graded recommendations for items for an evidenced-based enhanced perioperative protocol. METHODS: Studies were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined, reviewed and graded. A consensus recommendation was reached after critical appraisal of the literature by the group. RESULTS: For most of the protocol items, recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials (quality of evidence and recommendations according to the GRADE system). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of perioperative care for colonic surgery.

Couple and family treatments: study quality and level of evidence.

This paper examines the application of the guidelines for evidence-based treatments in family therapy developed by Sexton and collaborators to a set of treatment models. These guidelines classify the models using criteria that take into account the distinctive features of couple and family treatments. A two-step approach was taken: (1) The quality of each of the studies supporting the treatment models was assessed according to a list of ad hoc core criteria; (2) the level of evidence of each treatment model was determined using the guidelines. To reflect the stages of empirical validation present in the literature, nine models were selected: three models each with high, moderate, and low levels of empirical validation, determined by the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The quality ratings highlighted the strengths and limitations of each of the studies that provided evidence backing the treatment models. The classification by level of evidence indicated that four of the models were level III, "evidence-based" treatments; one was a level II, "evidence-informed treatment with promising preliminary evidence-based results"; and four were level I, "evidence-informed" treatments. Using the guidelines helped identify treatments that are solid in terms of not only the number of RCTs but also the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of a given treatment. From a research perspective, this analysis highlighted areas to be addressed before some models can move up to a higher level of evidence. From a clinical perspective, the guidelines can help identify the models whose studies have produced clinically relevant results.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost), or clearly do not. Weak recommendations indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include: early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures prior to antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for post-operative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B) targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization ( 2C ); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper GI bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSION: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

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.