Evidence-based provisional clinical classification criteria for autoinflammatory periodic fevers.

The objective of this work was to develop and validate a set of clinical criteria for the classification of patients affected by periodic fevers. Patients with inherited periodic fevers (familial Mediterranean fever (FMF); mevalonate kinase deficiency (MKD); tumour necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic fever syndrome (TRAPS); cryopyrin-associated periodic syndromes (CAPS)) enrolled in the Eurofever Registry up until March 2013 were evaluated. Patients with periodic fever, aphthosis, pharyngitis and adenitis (PFAPA) syndrome were used as negative controls. For each genetic disease, patients were considered to be 'gold standard' on the basis of the presence of a confirmatory genetic analysis. Clinical criteria were formulated on the basis of univariate and multivariate analysis in an initial group of patients (training set) and validated in an independent set of patients (validation set). A total of 1215 consecutive patients with periodic fevers were identified, and 518 gold standard patients (291 FMF, 74 MKD, 86 TRAPS, 67 CAPS) and 199 patients with PFAPA as disease controls were evaluated. The univariate and multivariate analyses identified a number of clinical variables that correlated independently with each disease, and four provisional classification scores were created. Cut-off values of the classification scores were chosen using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis as those giving the highest sensitivity and specificity. The classification scores were then tested in an independent set of patients (validation set) with an area under the curve of 0.98 for FMF, 0.95 for TRAPS, 0.96 for MKD, and 0.99 for CAPS. In conclusion, evidence-based provisional clinical criteria with high sensitivity and specificity for the clinical classification of patients with inherited periodic fevers have been developed.

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians' detection of health risks and patients' risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people's health. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not. SETTING: General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14-24 year old patients. INTERVENTION: This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients' risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients' sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data. RESULTS: 42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0·52, CI 0·28 to 0·96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0·66, CI 0·46 to 0·96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0·40, CI 0·20 to 0·80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

L'utilisation des anticoagulants oraux directs chez les patients âgés : les limites de la médecine fondée sur les preuves [The use of the new direct oral anticoagulants among older subjects: The limits of the evidence-based medicine?].

The growing use of direct oral anticoagulants, in particular among older subjects, raises questions about the limits of the evidence-based medicine. The phase III studies that have validated the efficacy and the safety profile of these molecules (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) in their both indications, the venous thromboembolic disease and the non-valvular atrial fibrillation raise concerns in four major fields: the financial support of pharmaceutical companies, the links of interest for many authors with the industry, the study design (exclusively non-inferiority studies), and the poor representativeness of the older subjects included. All these points are discussed, using data of sub-groups studies, post-marketing studies and recent meta-analysis. The lack of data for the very old subjects, with frailty or comorbidities, remains the main concern from these phase III studies.

Les méthodes d'études de cas en psychothérapie: perspectives actuelles [Methods of psychotherapy case studies: current perspectives].

There is a renewal of interest among psychotherapy researchers and psychotherapists towards psychotherapy case studies. This article presents two paradigms that have greatly influenced this increasing interest in psychotherapy case studies : the pragmatic case study and the theory-building case study paradigm. The origins, developments and key-concepts of both paradigms are presented, as well as their methodological and ethical specificities. Examples of case studies, along with models developed, are cited. The differential influence of the post-modern schools on both paradigms are presented, as well as their contribution to the field of methods of psychotherapy case studies discussed and assessed in terms of relevance for the researcher and the psychotherapist.

The international multidisciplinary consensus conference on multimodality monitoring in neurocritical care: evidentiary tables : a statement for healthcare professionals from the neurocritical care society and the European society of intensive care medicine.

A variety of technologies have been developed to assist decision-making during the management of patients with acute brain injury who require intensive care. A large body of research has been generated describing these various technologies. The Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) in collaboration with the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), the Society for Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Latin America Brain Injury Consortium (LABIC) organized an international, multidisciplinary consensus conference to perform a systematic review of the published literature to help develop evidence-based practice recommendations on bedside physiologic monitoring. This supplement contains a Consensus Summary Statement with recommendations and individual topic reviews on physiologic processes important in the care of acute brain injury. In this article we provide the evidentiary tables for select topics including systemic hemodynamics, intracranial pressure, brain and systemic oxygenation, EEG, brain metabolism, biomarkers, processes of care and monitoring in emerging economies to provide the clinician ready access to evidence that supports recommendations about neuromonitoring.

Standard care practices and psychosocial interventions aimed at reducing parental distress following stillbirth: A systematic narrative review

Objective: To summarise and critically evaluate the evidence informing the provision of standard care practices and psychosocial interventions following stillbirth. Background: Stillbirth is increasingly recognised as a significant bereavement experience with the potential to cause substantial psychological distress for parents. Standard care practices and psychosocial interventions to support parents have undergone dramatic changes, with limited basis in evidence. Methods: A systematic narrative review was conducted of quantitative studies examining interventions designed to reduce psychological distress in parents following the loss of a stillborn baby. Results: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. Substantial methodological weaknesses were identified among reviewed studies, including small and heterogeneous loss samples, weak study designs and lack of clarity in reported methods and outcomes. Inadequate replication of many findings substantially limits the generalisability of the evidence. Conclusion: Tentative evidence was found for the provision of mementoes of the baby and information regarding the cause of the loss, support group attendance, and cognitive behavioural interventions for parents identified with clinical levels of distress. Contradictory findings for the impact of contact with the baby prevent the formation of clear conclusions for this practice. Due to the methodological weaknesses prevalent in the research identified, the current evidence base is not considered sufficiently able to reliably inform care practices and intervention approaches. High-quality research evidence in this field is urgently required.

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.