User behaviour, best practice and the risks of non-target exposure associated with anticoagulant rodenticide use

Usage of anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) is an integral component of modern agriculture and is essential for the control of commensal rodent populations. However, the extensive deployment of ARs has led to widespread exposure of a range of non-target predatory birds and mammals to some compounds, in particular the second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SCARS). As a result, there has been considerable effort placed into devising voluntary best practice guidelines that increase the efficacy of rodent control and reduce the risk of non-target exposure. Currently, there is limited published information on actual practice amongst users or implementation of best practice. We assessed the behaviour of a typical group of users using an on-farm questionnaire survey. Most baited for rodents every year using SGARs. Most respondents were apparently aware of the risks of non-target exposure and adhered to some of the best practice recommendations but total compliance was rare. Our questionnaire revealed that users of first generation anticoagulant rodenticides rarely protected or checked bait stations, and so took little effort to prevent primary exposure of non-targets. Users almost never searched for and removed poisoned carcasses and many baited for prolonged periods or permanently. These factors are all likely to enhance the likelihood of primary and secondary exposure of non-target species. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Desire for hastened death in patients with advanced disease and the evidence base of clinical guidelines:a systematic review

Patients' desire for hastened death within the context of advanced disease and palliative care is a controversial topic, frequently discussed in the international literature. Much of the discussion has focused on opinion and debate about ethical matters related to hastened death. Not many research studies seem to have specifically targeted why palliative care patients may desire hastened death, and few have focused on clinical guidelines for responding to such requests.

Diagnosis and management of hyponatraemia: AGREEing the guidelines

Hyponatraemia is a common electrolyte disorder associated with significant complications and controversies regarding its optimal management. Clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements have attempted to provide clinicians with evidence-based diagnostic and treatment strategies for hyponatraemia. Recently published guidance documents differ in their methods employed to review the quality of available evidence. Nagler et al. used the Appraisal of Guideline for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument in a systematic review of guidelines and consensus statements for the diagnosis and management of hyponatraemia. Nagler and colleagues highlighted the variability in methodological rigour applied to guideline development and inconsistencies between publications in relation to management of hyponatraemia (including the recommended rate of correction of a low serum sodium concentration). These differences could cause confusion for practising physicians managing patients with hyponatraemia.

Common causes and current guidelines

Chronic cough is a common and disabling symptom. Recent guidelines have attempted to provide direction in the clinical management of cough in both primary and secondary care. They have also provided a critical review of the available literature and identified gaps in current knowledge. Despite this they have been criticized for a reliance on a low quality evidence base. In this review, we summarize the current consensus on the clinical management of chronic cough and attempt to rationalize this based on recent evidence. We have also provided an overview of the likely pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for cough and highlighted areas, where knowledge deficits exist and suggest directions for future research. Such progress will be critical in the search for new and effective treatments for cough.

A Benefit-Risk Assessment Framework for Development of Clinical Guidelines in Diagnostic Radiology

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2015-12

A Review of National Guidelines for Management of COPD in Europe

The quality of care can be improved by the development and implementation of evidence-based treatment guidelines. Different national guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exist in Europe and relevant differences may exist among them.This was an evaluation of COPD treatment guidelines published in Europe and Russia in the past 7 years. Each guideline was reviewed in detail and information about the most important aspects of patient diagnosis, risk stratification and pharmacotherapy was extracted following a standardised process. Guidelines were available from the Czech Republic, England and Wales, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain and Sweden. The treatment goals, criteria for COPD diagnosis, consideration of comorbidities in treatment selection and support for use of long-acting bronchodilators, were similar across treatment guidelines. There were differences in measures used for stratification of disease severity, consideration of patient phenotypes, criteria for the use of inhaled corticosteroids and recommendations for other medications (e.g. theophylline and mucolytics) in addition to bronchodilators.There is generally good agreement on treatment goals, criteria for diagnosis of COPD and use of long-acting bronchodilators as the cornerstone of treatment among guidelines for COPD management in Europe and Russia. However, there are differences in the definitions of patient subgroups and other recommended treatments.

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 Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (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 (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) 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 before 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 postoperative 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 gastrointestinal 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); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Guidelines for the clinical management of atrial fibrillation: a practical perspective.

Since the management of atrial fibrillation may be difficult in the individual patient, our purpose was to develop simple clinical recommendations to help the general internist manage this common clinical problem. Systematic review of the literature with evaluation of data-related evidence and framing of graded recommendations. Atrial fibrillation affects some 1% of the population in Western countries and is linked to a significant increase in morbidity and mortality. The management of atrial fibrillation requires individualised evaluation of the risks and benefits of therapeutic modalities, relying whenever possible on simple and validated tools. The two main points requiring a decision in clinical management are 1) whether or not to implement thromboembolic prevention therapy, and 2) whether preference should be given to a "rate control" or "rhythm control" strategy. Thromboembolic prophylaxis should be prescribed after individualised risk assessment: for patients at risk, oral anticoagulation with warfarin decreases the rate of embolic complications by 60% and aspirin by 20%, at the expense of an increased incidence of haemorrhagic complications. "Rate control" and "rhythm control" strategies are probably equivalent, and the choice should also be made on an individualised basis. To assist the physician in making his choices for the care of an atrial fibrillation patient we propose specific tables and algorithms, with graded recommendations. On the evidence of data from the literature we propose simple algorithms and tables for the clinical management of atrial fibrillation in the individual patient.

The new EASL guidelines for the management of chronic hepatitis B infection adapted for Swiss physicians.

Since the arrival of several new antivirals and due to the growing molecular and clinical knowledge of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, therapy of hepatitis B has become complex. Clinical guidelines aim at streamlining medical attitudes: in this respect, the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) recently issued clinical practice guidelines for the management of chronic hepatitis B. Guidelines made by international experts need however to be adapted to local health care systems. Here, we summarise the EASL guidelines with some minor modifications in order to be compatible with the particular Swiss situation, while discussing in more detail some aspects. Chronic hepatitis B is a complex disease with several phases where host and viral factors interact: the features of this continuous interplay need to be evaluated when choosing the most appropriate treatment. The EASL guidelines recommend, as first-line agents, using the most potent antivirals available with the optimal resistance profile, in order to abate HBV DNA as rapidly and as sustainably as possible. Once therapy has been started, the infection evolves and resistant viral strains may emerge. Rescue therapy needs to be started early with more potent agents lacking cross-resistance.

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.

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.

Evidence-Based Practice in PubMed: Are Shared Filters Useful to Health Sciences Academic Users?

Objectives In April 2010, the Université de Montréal’s Health Sciences Library has implemented shared filters in its institutional PubMed account. Most of these filters are designed to highlight resources for evidence-based practice, such as Clinical Queries, Systematic Reviews and Evidence-based Synopsis. We now want to measure how those filters are perceived and used by our users. Methods For one month, data was gathered through an online questionnaire proposed to users of Université de Montréal’s PubMed account. A print version was also distributed to participants in information literacy workshops given by the health sciences librarians. Respondents were restricted to users affiliated to Université de Montréal’s faculties of Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Sciences, Nursing and Pharmacy. Basic user information such as year/program of study or department affiliation was also collected. The questionnaire allowed users to identify the filters they use, assess the relevance of filters, and also suggest new ones. Results Survey results showed that the shared filters of Université de Montreal’s PubMed account were found useful by the majority of respondents. Filters allowing rapid access to secondary resources ranked among the most relevant (Reviews, Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Practice Guidelines and Clinical Evidence). For Clinical Study Queries, Randomized Controlled Trial (Therapy/Narrow) was considered the most useful. Some new shared filters have been suggested by respondents. Finally, 18% of the respondents indicated that they did not quite understand the relevance of filters. Conclusion Based on the survey results, shared filters considered most useful will be kept, some will be enhanced and others removed so that suggested ones could be added. The fact that some respondents did not understand well the relevance of filters could potentially be addressed through our PubMed workshops, online library guides or by renaming some filters in a more meaningful way.

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.