Appropriateness of respiratory care: development of evidence-based guidelines in an acute care hospital

Background: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians, and health services researchers. Methods: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was performed for the period between 1995 and 2008 based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. Publications were assessed according to the Oxford classification of quality of evidence. 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. Each indication for respiratory care was classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate, based on the panel median rating and the degree of intra-panel agreement. 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, noninstrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition, and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of evidence from literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus of 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.

Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS).

A group of European experts was commissioned to establish guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) from evidence published up until March 2014, regarding pain, movement disorders, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, tinnitus, depression, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, craving/addiction, and conversion. Despite unavoidable inhomogeneities, there is a sufficient body of evidence to accept with level A (definite efficacy) the analgesic effect of high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the pain and the antidepressant effect of HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). A Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for the antidepressant effect of low-frequency (LF) rTMS of the right DLPFC, HF-rTMS of the left DLPFC for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, and LF-rTMS of contralesional M1 in chronic motor stroke. The effects of rTMS in a number of indications reach level C (possible efficacy), including LF-rTMS of the left temporoparietal cortex in tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. It remains to determine how to optimize rTMS protocols and techniques to give them relevance in routine clinical practice. In addition, professionals carrying out rTMS protocols should undergo rigorous training to ensure the quality of the technical realization, guarantee the proper care of patients, and maximize the chances of success. Under these conditions, the therapeutic use of rTMS should be able to develop in the coming years.

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.

Catheterisation. Indwelling catheters in adults. Urethral and suprapubic. Evidence-based guidelines for best practice in urological health care

The EAUN Guidelines Working Group for indwelling catheters have prepared this guideline document to help nurses assess the evidence-based management of catheter care and to incorporate the guidelines’ recommendations into their clinical practice. These guidelines are not meant to be proscriptive, nor will adherence to these guidelines guarantee a successful outcome in all cases. Ultimately, decisions regarding care must be made on a case-by-case basis by healthcare professionals after consultation with their patients using their clinical judgement, knowledge and expertise.

Evidence-based guidelines for interpreting change scores for the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30

Aim: To use published literature and experts' opinion to investigate the clinical meaning and magnitude of changes in the Quality of Life (QOL) of groups of patients measured with the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Methods: An innovative method combining systematic review of published studies, expert opinions and meta-analysis was used to estimate large, medium, and small mean changes over time for QLQ-C30 scores. Results: Nine hundred and eleven papers were identified, leading to 118 relevant papers. One thousand two hundred and thirty two mean changes in QOL over time were combined in the meta-analysis, with timescales ranging from four days to five years. Guidelines were produced for trivial, small, and medium size classes, for each subscale and for improving and declining scores separately. Estimates for improvements were smaller than respective estimates for declines. Conclusions: These guidelines can be used to aid sample size calculations and interpretation of mean changes over time from groups of patients. Observed mean changes in the QLQ-C30 scores are generally small in most clinical situations, possibly due to response shift. Careful consideration is needed when planning studies where QOL changes over time are of primary interest; the timing of follow up, sample attrition, direction of QOL changes, and subscales of primary interest are key considerations. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Management of acute bronchiolitis: can evidence based guidelines alter clinical practice?

BACKGROUND: Acute bronchiolitis is the most common lower respiratory tract infection in infants and there is no evidence that drug treatment alters its natural course. Despite this, most Swiss paediatricians reported in 2001 prescribing bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). This situation led to the creation of national guidelines followed by a tailored implementation programme. The aim of this study was to examine if treatment practices changed after the implementation of the new guidelines. METHODS: A questionnaire on treatment of bronchiolitis was sent to all Swiss paediatricians before (2001) and after (2006) creation and implementation of national guidelines (2003-2005). Guidelines were created in collaboration with all paediatric pulmonologists and implemented carefully using a multifaceted approach. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 541 paediatricians (58%) in 2001 and by 639 (54%) in 2006. While both surveys showed a wide variation in the treatment of bronchiolitis between physicians, reported drug prescription decreased significantly between the two surveys. For outpatients, general use (for all patients) of bronchodilators dropped from 60% to 23%, and general use of ICS from 34% to 6%. For inpatients, general use of bronchodilators and ICS dropped from 55% to 18% and from 26% to 6%, respectively (all p<0.001). The decrease was evident in all regions, among hospital and primary care physicians, and among general paediatricians and paediatric pulmonologists. CONCLUSIONS: National guidelines together with a tailored implementation programme can have a major impact on medical management practices in a country.

Prophylaxis of infectious complications with colony-stimulating factors in adult cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy-evidence-based guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party AGIHO of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO).

BACKGROUND Current evidence on myelopoietic growth factors is difficult to overview for the practicing haematologist/oncologist. International guidelines are sometimes conflicting, exclude certain patient groups, or cannot directly be applied to the German health system. This guideline by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) gives evidence-based recommendations for the use of G-CSF, pegylated G-CSF, and biosimilars to prevent infectious complications in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, including those with haematological malignancies. METHODS We systematically searched and evaluated current evidence. An expert panel discussed the results and recommendations. We then compared our recommendations to current international guidelines. RESULTS We summarised the data from eligible studies in evidence tables, developed recommendations for different entities and risk groups. CONCLUSION Comprehensive literature search and expert panel consensus confirmed many key recommendations given by international guidelines. Evidence for growth factors during acute myeloid leukaemia induction chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim use in haematological malignancies was rated lower compared with other guidelines.

Challenges, Strengths and Opportunities Related to Implementing Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines on Breast Cancer Survivorship Care by Primary Care Physicians and Nurse Practitioners in Southeastern Ontario

Background Many breast cancer survivors continue to have a broad range of physical and psychosocial problems after breast cancer treatment. As cancer centres move forward with earlier discharge of stable breast cancer survivors to primary care follow-up it is important that comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care is implemented to effectively address these needs. Research suggests primary care providers are willing to provide breast cancer survivorship care but many lack the knowledge and confidence to provide evidence-based care. Purpose The overall purpose of this thesis was to determine the challenges, strengths and opportunities related to implementing comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship guidelines by primary care physicians and nurse practitioners in southeastern Ontario. Methods This mixed-methods research was conducted in three phases: (1) synthesis and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines relevant to provision of breast cancer survivorship care within the primary care practice setting; (2) a brief quantitative survey of primary care providers to determine actual practices related to provision of evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care; and (3) individual interviews with primary care providers about the challenges, strengths and opportunities related to provision of comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care. Results and Conclusions In the first phase, a comprehensive clinical practice framework was created to guide provision of breast cancer survivorship care and consisted of a one-page checklist outlining breast cancer survivorship issues relevant to primary care, a three-page summary of key recommendations, and a one-page list of guideline sources. The second phase identified several knowledge and practice gaps, and it was determined that guideline implementation rates were higher for recommendations related to prevention and surveillance aspects of survivorship care and lowest related to screening for and management of long-term effects. The third phase identified three major challenges to providing breast cancer survivorship care: inconsistent educational preparation, provider anxieties, and primary care burden; and three major strengths or opportunities to facilitate implementation of survivorship care guidelines: tools and technology, empowering survivors, and optimizing nursing roles. A better understanding of these challenges, strengths and opportunities will inform development of targeted knowledge translation interventions to provide support and education to primary care providers.

Towards evidence-based guidelines for wise use of computers by children

This paper argues for the systematic development and presentation of evidence-based guidelines for appropriate use of computers by children. The currently available guidelines are characterised and a proposed conceptual model presented. Five principles are presented as a foundation to the guidelines. The paper concludes with a framework for the guidelines, key evidence for and against guidelines, and gaps in the available evidence, with the aim of facilitating further discussion. Relevance to industry The current generation of children in affluent countries will typically have over 10 years of computer experience before they enter the workforce. Consequently, the primary prevention of computer-related health disorders and the development of good productivity skills for the next generation of workers needs to occur during childhood. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Challenges, Strengths and Opportunities Related to Implementing Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines on Breast Cancer Survivorship Care by Primary Care Physicians and Nurse Practitioners in Southeastern Ontario

Background Many breast cancer survivors continue to have a broad range of physical and psychosocial problems after breast cancer treatment. As cancer centres move forward with earlier discharge of stable breast cancer survivors to primary care follow-up it is important that comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care is implemented to effectively address these needs. Research suggests primary care providers are willing to provide breast cancer survivorship care but many lack the knowledge and confidence to provide evidence-based care. Purpose The overall purpose of this thesis was to determine the challenges, strengths and opportunities related to implementing comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship guidelines by primary care physicians and nurse practitioners in southeastern Ontario. Methods This mixed-methods research was conducted in three phases: (1) synthesis and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines relevant to provision of breast cancer survivorship care within the primary care practice setting; (2) a brief quantitative survey of primary care providers to determine actual practices related to provision of evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care; and (3) individual interviews with primary care providers about the challenges, strengths and opportunities related to provision of comprehensive evidence-based breast cancer survivorship care. Results and Conclusions In the first phase, a comprehensive clinical practice framework was created to guide provision of breast cancer survivorship care and consisted of a one-page checklist outlining breast cancer survivorship issues relevant to primary care, a three-page summary of key recommendations, and a one-page list of guideline sources. The second phase identified several knowledge and practice gaps, and it was determined that guideline implementation rates were higher for recommendations related to prevention and surveillance aspects of survivorship care and lowest related to screening for and management of long-term effects. The third phase identified three major challenges to providing breast cancer survivorship care: inconsistent educational preparation, provider anxieties, and primary care burden; and three major strengths or opportunities to facilitate implementation of survivorship care guidelines: tools and technology, empowering survivors, and optimizing nursing roles. A better understanding of these challenges, strengths and opportunities will inform development of targeted knowledge translation interventions to provide support and education to primary care providers.

Study of criteria influencing the success rate of DNA swabs in operational conditions: a contribution to an evidence-based approach to crime scene investigation and triage

DNA is nowadays swabbed routinely to investigate serious and volume crimes, but research remains scarce when it comes to determining the criteria that may impact the success rate of DNA swabs taken on different surfaces and situations. To investigate these criteria in fully operational conditions, DNA analysis results of 4772 swabs taken by the forensic unit of a police department in Western Switzerland over a 2.5-year period (2012-2014) in volume crime cases were considered. A representative and random sample of 1236 swab analyses was extensively examined and codified, describing several criteria such as whether the swabbing was performed at the scene or in the lab, the zone of the scene where it was performed, the kind of object or surface that was swabbed, whether the target specimen was a touch surface or a biological fluid, and whether the swab targeted a single surface or combined different surfaces. The impact of each criterion and of their combination was assessed in regard to the success rate of DNA analysis, measured through the quality of the resulting profile, and whether the profile resulted in a hit in the national database or not. Results show that some situations - such as swabs taken on door and window handles for instance - have a higher success rate than average swabs. Conversely, other situations lead to a marked decrease in the success rate, which should discourage further analyses of such swabs. Results also confirm that targeting a DNA swab on a single surface is preferable to swabbing different surfaces with the intent to aggregate cells deposited by the offender. Such results assist in predicting the chance that the analysis of a swab taken in a given situation will lead to a positive result. The study could therefore inform an evidence-based approach to decision-making at the crime scene (what to swab or not) and at the triage step (what to analyse or not), contributing thus to save resource and increase the efficiency of forensic science efforts.

Beyond the Pro and Contra of Evidence-Based Practice: Reflections on a Recurring Dilemma at the Core of Social Work

Currently, social work is witnessing a quite polarized debate about what should be the basis for good practice. Simply stated, the different attempts to define the required basis for effective and accountable interventions in social work practice can be grouped in two paradigmatic positions, which seem to be in strong opposition to each other. On the one hand the highly influential evidence based practice movement highlights the necessity to base practice interventions on proven effectiveness from empirical research. Despite some variations, such as between narrow conceptions of evidence based practice (see e.g. McNeece/Thyer, 2004) and broader approaches to it (see e.g. Gambrill, 1999, 2001, 2008), the evidence based practice movement embodies a positivist orientation and more explicitly scientific aspirations of social work by using positivistic empirical strategies. Critics of the evidence based practice movement argue that its narrow epistemological assumptions are not appropriate for the understanding of social phenomena and that evidence based guidelines to practice are insufficient to deal with the extremely complex activities social work practice requires in different and always somewhat unique practice situations (Webb, 2001; Gray & Mc Donald, 2006; Otto, Polutta &Ziegler, 2009). Furthermore critics of evidence based practice argue that it privileges an uncritical and a-political positivism which seems highly problematic in the current climate of welfare state reforms, in which the question ‘what works’ is highly politicized and the legitimacy of professional social work practice is being challenged maybe more than ever before (Kessl, 2009). Both opponents and proponents of evidence based practice argue on the epistemological, the methodological and the ethical level to sustain their point of view and raise fundamental questions about the real nature of social work practice, so that one could get the impression that social work is really at the crossroads between two very different conceptions of social work practice and its further professional development (Stepney, 2009). However, this article is not going to merely rehearse the pro and contra of different positions that are being invoked in the debate about evidence based practice. Instead it aims to go further by identifying the dilemmas underlying these positions which - so it is argued – re-emerge in the debate about evidence based practice, but which are older than this debate. They concern the fundamental ambivalence modern professionalization processes in social work were subjected to from their very beginnings.

Evidence-based medicine is affordable: The cost-effectiveness of current compared with optimal treatment in rheumatoid and osteoarthritis

Objective. To determine the cost-effectiveness of averting the burden of disease. We used secondary population data and metaanalyses of various government-funded services and interventions to investigate the costs and benefits of various levels of treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) in adults using a burden of disease framework. Method. Population burden was calculated for both diseases in the absence of any treatment as years lived with disability (YLD), ignoring the years of life lost. We then estimated the proportion of burden averted with current interventions, the proportion that could be averted with optimally implemented cut-rent evidence-based guidelines, and the direct treatment cost-effectiveness ratio in dollars per YLD averted for both treatment levels. Results. The majority of people with arthritis sought medical treatment. Current treatment for RA averted 26% of the burden, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $19,000 per YLD averted. Optimal, evidence-based treatment would avert 48% of the burden. with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,000 per YLD averted. Current treatment of OA in Australia averted 27% of the burden, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,000 per YLD averted. Optimal, evidence-based treatment would avert 39% of the burden, with an unchanged cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,000 per YLD averted. Conclusion. While the precise dollar costs in each country will differ, the relativities at this level of coverage should remain the same. There is no evidence that closing the gap between evidence and practice would result in a drop in efficiency.