Clinical practice recommendations for bipolar disorder

Objective:  To provide clinically relevant evidence-based recommendations for the management of bipolar disorder in adults that are informative, easy to assimilate and facilitate clinical decision-making.Method:  A comprehensive literature review of over 500 articles was undertaken using electronic database search engines (e.g. MEDLINE, PsychINFO and Cochrane reviews). In addition articles, book chapters and other literature known to the authors were reviewed. The findings were then formulated into a set of recommendations that were developed by a multidisciplinary team of clinicians who routinely deal with mood disorders. These preliminary recommendations underwent extensive consultative review by a broader advisory panel that included experts in the field, clinical staff and patient representatives.Results:  The clinical practice recommendations for bipolar disorder (bipolar CPR) summarise evidence-based treatments and provide a synopsis of recommendations relating to each phase of the illness. They are designed for clinical use and have therefore been presented succinctly in an innovative and engaging manner that is clear and informative.Conclusion:  These up-to-date recommendations provide an evidence-based framework that incorporates clinical wisdom and consideration of individual factors in the management of bipolar disorder. Further, the novel style and practical approach should promote their uptake and implementation.

Barriers to primary care clinician adherence to clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain: protocol of a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain is the highest ranked condition contributing to years lived with disability, and is a significant economic and societal burden. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are designed to improve quality of care and reduce practice variation by providing graded recommendations based on the best available evidence. Studies of low back pain guideline implementation have shown no or modest effects at changing clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To identify enablers and barriers to adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies that will be conducted and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement guidelines. Eight databases will be searched using a priori inclusion/exclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers will conduct a structured review and meta-synthesis, and a third reviewer will arbitrate where there is disagreement. This protocol has been registered on PROSPERO 2014. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The review will also be disseminated electronically, in print and at conferences. Updates of the review will be conducted to inform and guide healthcare translation into practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014012961. Available from http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42014012961.

Barriers to primary care clinician adherence to clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

INTRODUCTION: Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for the management of low back pain that contain consistent messages, large evidence-practice gaps in primary care remain.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies that have explored primary care clinicians' perceptions and beliefs about guidelines for low back pain, including perceived enablers and barriers to guideline adherence.

METHODS: Studies investigatingperceptions and beliefs about low back pain guidelines were included if participants were primary care clinicians and qualitative methods had been used for both data collection and analysis. We searched major databases up to July 2014. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, extracted data, appraised method quality using the CASP checklist, conducted thematic analysis and synthesized the results in narrative format.

RESULTS: Seventeen studies, with a total of 705 participants, were included. We identified three key emergent themes and eight subthemes: (1) guideline implementation and adherence beliefs and perceptions; (2) maintaining the patient-clinician relationship with imaging referrals; (3) barriers to guideline implementation. Clinicians believed that guidelines were categorical, prescriptive and constrained professional practice; however popular clinical practices superseded the guidelines. Imaging referrals were used to manage consultations and to obtain definitive diagnoses. Clinicians' perceptions reflected a lack of content knowledge and understanding of how guidelines are developed.

DISCUSSION: Addressing misconceptions and other barriers to uptake of evidence-based guidelines for managing low back pain is needed to improve knowledge transfer and close the evidence-practice gap in the treatment of this common condition.

Committees for ethics in research involving human subjects

In Brazil since October 1996 there have been guidelines for research involving human subjects. Now human subjects know when their treatment is part of research. Deceit is no longer tolerated. But is not enough to say we offer an explanation to the potential subject and we offer a choice before he or she is confronted with an informed consent form. As in all professional activity, scientific investigation needs social controls. In Brazil, the ultimate responsibility of an investigation lies on the investigator, but in every institution where research is carried out there is a Committee for Ethics in Research. All Committees are subordinated to the National Commission of Ethics in Research, which is submitted to the Brazilian Institute of Health. During 2005 around 17,000 protocols involving 700,000 human subjects were revised by 475 Committees distributed all over the country. Approximately 7,000 people are now working in these Committees.

The EXTRIP (EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning) workgroup: Guideline methodology

Extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs), such as hemodialysis and hemoperfusion, are used in poisoning despite a lack of controlled human trials demonstrating efficacy. To provide uniform recommendations, the EXTRIP group was formed as an international collaboration among recognized experts from nephrology, clinical toxicology, critical care, or pharmacology and supported by over 30 professional societies. For every poison, the clinical benefit of ECTR is weighed against associated complications, alternative therapies, and costs. Rigorous methodology, using the AGREE instrument, was developed and ratified. Methods rely on evidence appraisal and, in the absence of robust studies, on a thorough and transparent process of consensus statements. Twenty-four poisons were chosen according to their frequency, available evidence, and relevance. A systematic literature search was performed in order to retrieve all original publications regardless of language. Data were extracted on a standardized instrument. Quality of the evidence was assessed by GRADE as: High = A, Moderate = B, Low = C, Very Low = D. For every poison, dialyzability was assessed and clinical effect of ECTR summarized. All pertinent documents were submitted to the workgroup with a list of statements for vote (general statement, indications, timing, ECTR choice). A modified Delphi method with two voting rounds was used, between which deliberation was required. Each statement was voted on a Likert scale (1-9) to establish the strength of recommendation. This approach will permit the production of the first important practice guidelines on this topic.

Prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of sepsis: 1st revision of S-2k guidelines of the German Sepsis Society (Deutsche Sepsis-Gesellschaft e.V. (DSG)) and the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI))

Practice guidelines are systematically developed statements and recommendations that assist the physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care measures for specific clinical circumstances taking into account specific national health care structures. The 1(st) revision of the S-2k guideline of the German Sepsis Society in collaboration with 17 German medical scientific societies and one self-help group provides state-of-the-art information (results of controlled clinical trials and expert knowledge) on the effective and appropriate medical care (prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care) of critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The guideline had been developed according to the "German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal" of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). In view of the inevitable advancements in scientific knowledge and technical expertise, revisions, updates and amendments must be periodically initiated. The guideline recommendations may not be applied under all circumstances. It rests with the clinician to decide whether a certain recommendation should be adopted or not, taking into consideration the unique set of clinical facts presented in connection with each individual patient as well as the available resources.

ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: the Task Force for the management of dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) due to atherosclerosis of the arterial vessel wall and to thrombosis is the foremost cause of premature mortality and of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in Europe, and is also increasingly common in developing countries.1 In the European Union, the economic cost of CVD represents annually E192 billion1 in direct and indirect healthcare costs. The main clinical entities are coronary artery disease (CAD), ischaemic stroke, and peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The causes of these CVDs are multifactorial. Some of these factors relate to lifestyles, such as tobacco smoking, lack of physical activity, and dietary habits, and are thus modifiable. Other risk factors are also modifiable, such as elevated blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, and dyslipidaemias, or non-modifiable, such as age and male gender. These guidelines deal with the management of dyslipidaemias as an essential and integral part of CVD prevention. Prevention and treatment of dyslipidaemias should always be considered within the broader framework of CVD prevention, which is addressed in guidelines of the Joint European Societies’ Task forces on CVD prevention in clinical practice.2 – 5 The latest version of these guidelines was published in 20075; an update will become available in 2012. These Joint ESC/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines on the management of dyslipidaemias are complementary to the guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice and address not only physicians [e.g. general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists] interested in CVD prevention, but also specialists from lipid clinics or metabolic units who are dealing with dyslipidaemias that are more difficult to classify and treat.

Physician perceptions of risk regarding mood disorders and pharmacological management during pregnancy: What is current practice?

Mood disorders are the most common form of mental illness and one of the leading causes of morbidity worldwide. Major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder have a lifetime prevalence of 16.2% and 4.4%, respectively. Women comprise a substantial proportion of this population, and an estimated 500,000 pregnancies each year involve women with a psychiatric condition. Management with psychotropic medications is considered standard of care for most patients with mood disorders. However, many of these medications are known human teratogens. Because pregnant women with mood disorders face a high risk of relapse if unmanaged, the obstetrician faces a unique challenge in providing the best care to both mother and baby. It has been suggested that many obstetricians overestimate the teratogenic risks associated with psychotropic medications, while concurrently underestimating the risks associated with unmanaged mood disorders. This may be due a knowledge gap regarding the most current teratogen information, and lack of official management guidelines. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the current knowledge base of obstetricians regarding the teratogenic effects of common psychotropic medications, as wells as to capture current management practices for pregnant women with mood disorders. A total of 117 Texas obstetricians responded to a survey regarding teratogen knowledge and management practice. It was common for respondents to encounter women who disclose both having a mood disorder and taking a psychotropic medication during pregnancy. Many respondents did not utilize up-to-date drug counseling resources, and were unaware of or over-estimated the teratogenic risks of common medications used to treat mood disorders. Finally, many respondents reported wanting to refer pregnant patients with mood disorders to psychiatrists for co-management, but are reportedly restricted in doing so due to accessibility or insurance issues. This study demonstrates that there is a knowledge gap among obstetricians regarding the teratogenicity of common psychotropic medications utilized to manage a patient population they frequently encounter. Further, obstetricians have vastly different risk perceptions of these medications, resulting in various management approaches and recommendations. Future research should focus on establishing standard practice guidelines, as well as better accessibility to psychiatric services for pregnant women.