Grading Of Recommendations Assessment, Development And Evaluation Approach Research Articles

Effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD with mild symptoms: a systematic review with meta-analyses.

PurposeMost guidelines recommend pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC) levels ≥2, but the effectiveness of PR in patients with less advanced disease is not well established. Our aim was to investigate the effects of PR in patients with COPD and mMRC ≤1.MethodsThe methodology was developed as a part of evidence-based guideline development and is in accordance with the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through a systematic, multidatabase literature search and selected RCTs comparing the effects of PR with usual care in patients with COPD and mMRC ≤1. Predefined critical outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adverse effects and mortality, while walking distance, maximal exercise capacity, muscle strength, and dropouts were important outcomes. Two authors independently extracted data, assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and graded the evidence. Meta-analyses were performed when deemed feasible.ResultsFour RCTs (489 participants) were included. On the basis of moderate-quality evidence, we found a clinically and statistically significant improvement in short-term HRQoL of 4.2 units (95% confidence interval [CI]: [−4.51 to −3.89]) on St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire, but not at the longest follow-up. We also found a statistically significant improvement of 25.71 m (95% CI: [15.76–35.65]) in the 6-minute walk test with PR; however, this improvement was not considered clinically relevant. No difference was found for mortality, and insufficient data prohibited meta-analysis for muscle strength and maximal exercise capacity. No adverse effects were reported.ConclusionWe found a moderate quality of evidence suggesting a small, significant improvement in short-term HRQoL and a clinically nonsignificant improvement in walking distance following PR in patients with COPD and mild symptoms. This resulted in a weak recommendation of routine PR in these patients using the GRADE approach.

Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation for the treatment of women with urinary incontinence.

Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation is a relatively novel, minimally invasive device-based intervention used to treat individuals with urinary incontinence (UI). No systematic review of the evidence supporting its use has been published to date. To evaluate the efficacy of transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation, compared with other interventions, in the treatment of women with UI.Review authors sought to compare the following.• Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus no treatment/sham treatment.• Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus conservative physical treatment.• Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus mechanical devices (pessaries for UI).• Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus drug treatment.• Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus injectable treatment for UI.• Transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus other surgery for UI. We conducted a systematic search of the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 19 December 2014), EMBASE and EMBASE Classic (January 1947 to 2014 Week 50), Google Scholar and three trials registries in December 2014, along with reference checking. We sought to identify unpublished studies by handsearching abstracts of major gynaecology and urology meetings, and by contacting experts in the field and the device manufacturer. Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation versus no treatment/sham treatment, conservative physical treatment, mechanical devices, drug treatment, injectable treatment for UI or other surgery for UI in women were eligible. We screened search results and selected eligible studies for inclusion. We assessed risk of bias and analysed dichotomous variables as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and continuous variables as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. We rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. We included in the analysis one small sham-controlled randomised trial of 173 women performed in the United States. Participants enrolled in this study had been diagnosed with stress UI and were randomly assigned to transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation (treatment) or a sham surgery using a non-functioning catheter (no treatment). Mean age of participants in the 12-month multi-centre trial was 50 years (range 22 to 76 years).Of three patient-important primary outcomes selected for this systematic review, the number of women reporting UI symptoms after intervention was not reported. No serious adverse events were reported for the transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation arm or the sham treatment arm during the 12-month trial. Owing to high risk of bias and imprecision, we downgraded the quality of evidence for this outcome to low. The effect of transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation on the number of women with an incontinence quality of life (I-QOL) score improvement ≥ 10 points at 12 months was as follows: RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.62; participants = 142, but the confidence interval was wide. For this outcome, the quality of evidence was also low as the result of high risk of bias and imprecision.We found no evidence on the number of women undergoing repeat continence surgery. The risk of other adverse events (pain/dysuria (RR 5.73, 95% CI 0.75 to 43.70; participants = 173); new detrusor overactivity (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.93; participants = 173); and urinary tract infection (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.24 to 3.86; participants = 173) could not be established reliably as the trial was small. Evidence was insufficient for assessment of whether use of transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation was associated with an increased rate of urinary retention, haematuria and hesitancy compared with sham treatment in 173 participants. The GRADE quality of evidence for all other adverse events with available evidence was low as the result of high risk of bias and imprecision.We found no evidence to inform comparisons of transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation with conservative physical treatment, mechanical devices, drug treatment, injectable treatment for UI or other surgery for UI. It is not known whether transurethral radiofrequency collagen denaturation, as compared with sham treatment, improves patient-reported symptoms of UI. Evidence is insufficient to show whether the procedure improves disease-specific quality of life. Evidence is also insufficient to show whether the procedure causes serious adverse events or other adverse events in comparison with sham treatment, and no evidence was found for comparison with any other method of treatment for UI.

Interventions for reducing medication errors in children in hospital.

Many hospitalised patients are affected by medication errors (MEs) that may cause discomfort, harm and even death. Children are at especially high risk of harm as the result of MEs because such errors are potentially more hazardous to them than to adults. Until now, interventions to reduce MEs have led to only limited improvements. To determine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing MEs and related harm in hospitalised children. The Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the following sources for primary studies: The Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Economic Evaluation Database (EED) and the Health Technology Assessments (HTA) database; MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, Proquest Dissertations & Theses, Web of Science (citation indexes and conference proceedings) and the EPOC Register of Studies. Related reviews were identified by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). Review authors searched grey literature sources and trial registries. They handsearched selected journals, contacted researchers in the field and scanned reference lists of relevant reviews. They conducted searches in November 2013 and November 2014. They applied neither language nor date limits. Randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series investigating interventions to improve medication safety in hospitalised children (≤ 18 years). Participants were healthcare professionals authorised to prescribe, dispense or administer medications. Outcome measures included MEs, (potential) patient harm, resource utilisation and unintended consequences of the interventions. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed study quality using the EPOC data collection checklist. We evaluated the risk of bias of included studies and used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the quality of the body of evidence. We described results narratively and presented them using GRADE tables. We included seven studies describing five different interventions: participation of a clinical pharmacist in a clinical team (n = 2), introduction of a computerised physician order entry system (n = 2), implementation of a barcode medication administration system (n = 1), use of a structured prescribing form (n = 1) and implementation of a check and control checklist in combination with feedback (n = 1).Clinical and methodological heterogeneity between studies precluded meta-analyses. Although some interventions described in this review show a decrease in MEs, the results are not consistent, and none of the studies resulted in a significant reduction in patient harm. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall quality and strengfh of the evidence are low. Current evidence on effective interventions to prevent MEs in a paediatric population in hospital is limited. Comparative studies with robust study designs are needed to investigate interventions including components that focus on specific paediatric safety issues.

Fluphenazine decanoate (depot) and enanthate for schizophrenia.

Intramuscular injections (depot preparations) offer an advantage over oral medication for treating schizophrenia by reducing poor compliance. The benefits gained by long-acting preparations, however, may be offset by a higher incidence of adverse effects. To assess the effects of fluphenazine decanoate and enanthate versus oral anti-psychotics and other depot neuroleptic preparations for individuals with schizophrenia in terms of clinical, social and economic outcomes. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (February 2011 and October 16, 2013), which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials. We considered all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on people with schizophrenia comparing fluphenazine decanoate or enanthate with placebo or oral anti-psychotics or other depot preparations. We reliably selected, assessed the quality, and extracted data of the included studies. For dichotomous data, we estimated risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. We used the mean difference (MD) for normal continuous data. We excluded continuous data if loss to follow-up was greater than 50%. Tests of heterogeneity and for publication bias were undertaken. We used a fixed-effect model for all analyses unless there was high heterogeneity. For this update. we assessed risk of bias of included studies and used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to create a 'Summary of findings' table. This review now includes 73 randomised studies, with 4870 participants. Overall, the quality of the evidence is low to very low.Compared with placebo, use of fluphenazine decanoate does not result in any significant differences in death, nor does it reduce relapse over six months to one year, but one longer-term study found that relapse was significantly reduced in the fluphenazine arm (n = 54, 1 RCT, RR 0.35, CI 0.19 to 0.64, very low quality evidence). A very similar number of people left the medium-term studies (six months to one year) early in the fluphenazine decanoate (24%) and placebo (19%) groups, however, a two-year study significantly favoured fluphenazine decanoate (n = 54, 1 RCT, RR 0.47, CI 0.23 to 0.96, very low quality evidence). No significant differences were found in mental state measured on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) or in extrapyramidal adverse effects, although these outcomes were only reported in one small study each. No study comparing fluphenazine decanoate with placebo reported clinically significant changes in global state or hospital admissions.Fluphenazine decanoate does not reduce relapse more than oral neuroleptics in the medium term (n = 419, 6 RCTs, RR 1.46 CI 0.75 to 2.83, very low quality evidence). A small study found no difference in clinically significant changes in global state. No difference in the number of participants leaving the study early was found between fluphenazine decanoate (17%) and oral neuroleptics (18%), and no significant differences were found in mental state measured on the BPRS. Extrapyramidal adverse effects were significantly less for people receiving fluphenazine decanoate compared with oral neuroleptics (n = 259, 3 RCTs, RR 0.47 CI 0.24 to 0.91, very low quality evidence). No study comparing fluphenazine decanoate with oral neuroleptics reported death or hospital admissions.No significant difference in relapse rates in the medium term between fluphenazine decanoate and fluphenazine enanthate was found (n = 49, 1 RCT, RR 2.43, CI 0.71 to 8.32, very low quality evidence), immediate- and short-term studies were also equivocal. One small study reported the number of participants leaving the study early (29% versus 12%) and mental state measured on the BPRS and found no significant difference for either outcome. No significant difference was found in extrapyramidal adverse effects between fluphenazine decanoate and fluphenazine enanthate. No study comparing fluphenazine decanoate with fluphenazine enanthate reported death, clinically significant changes in global state or hospital admissions. There are more data for fluphenazine decanoate than for the enanthate ester. Both are effective antipsychotic preparations. Fluphenazine decanoate produced fewer movement disorder effects than other oral antipsychotics but data were of low quality, and overall, adverse effect data were equivocal. In the context of trials, there is little advantage of these depots over oral medications in terms of compliance but this is unlikely to be applicable to everyday clinical practice.

Evaluation and management of blunt traumatic aortic injury: a practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) is the second most common cause of death in trauma patients. Eighty percent of patients with BTAI will die before reaching a trauma center. The issues of how to diagnose, treat, and manage BTAI were first addressed by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) in the practice management guidelines on this topic published in 2000. Since that time, there have been advances in the management of BTAI. As a result, the EAST guidelines committee decided to develop updated guidelines for this topic using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework recently adopted by EAST. A systematic review of the MEDLINE database using PubMed was performed. The search retrieved English language articles regarding BTAI from 1998 to 2013. Letters to the editor, case reports, book chapters, and review articles were excluded. Topics of investigation included imaging to diagnose BTAI, type of operative repair, and timing of operative repair. Sixty articles were identified. Of these, 51 articles were selected to construct the guidelines. There have been changes in practice since the publication of the previous guidelines in 2000. Computed tomography of the chest with intravenous contrast is strongly recommended to diagnose clinically significant BTAI. Endovascular repair is strongly recommended for patients without contraindications. Delayed repair of BTAI is suggested, with the stipulation that effective blood pressure control must be used in these patients.

Antibiotic regimens for management of intra-amniotic infection.

Antibiotic regimens for management of intra-amniotic infection.

The management of diabetic foot ulcers through optimal off-loading: building consensus guidelines and practical recommendations to improve outcomes.

We sought to develop a consensus statement for the use of off-loading in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). A literature search of PubMed for evidence regarding off-loading of DFUs was initially conducted, followed by a meeting of authors on March 15, 2013, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to draft consensus statements and recommendations using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach to assess quality of evidence and develop strength of recommendations for each consensus statement. Evidence is clear that adequate off-loading increases the likelihood of DFU healing and that increased clinician use of effective off-loading is necessary. Recommendations are included to guide clinicians on the optimal use of off-loading based on an initial comprehensive patient/wound assessment and the necessity to improve patient adherence with off-loading devices. The likelihood of DFU healing is increased with off-loading adherence, and, current evidence favors the use of nonremovable casts or fixed ankle walking braces as optimum off-loading modalities. There currently exists a gap between what the evidence supports regarding the efficacy of DFU off-loading and what is performed in clinical practice despite expert consensus on the standard of care.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, hence interest in appropriate polypharmacy, where many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients, is growing. This review sought to determine which interventions, alone or in combination, are effective in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people. In November 2013, for this first update, a range of literature databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched, and handsearching of reference lists was performed. Search terms included 'polypharmacy', 'medication appropriateness' and 'inappropriate prescribing'. A range of study designs were eligible. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in people 65 years of age and older in which a validated measure of appropriateness was used (e.g. Beers criteria, Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI)). Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Study-specific estimates were pooled, and a random-effects model was used to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence for each pooled outcome. Two studies were added to this review to bring the total number of included studies to 12. One intervention consisted of computerised decision support; 11 complex, multi-faceted pharmaceutical approaches to interventions were provided in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals, such as prescribers and pharmacists. Appropriateness of prescribing was measured using validated tools, including the MAI score post intervention (eight studies), Beers criteria (four studies), STOPP criteria (two studies) and START criteria (one study). Interventions included in this review resulted in a reduction in inappropriate medication usage. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall quality of evidence for all pooled outcomes ranged from very low to low. A greater reduction in MAI scores between baseline and follow-up was seen in the intervention group when compared with the control group (four studies; mean difference -6.78, 95% CI -12.34 to -1.22). Postintervention pooled data showed a lower summated MAI score (five studies; mean difference -3.88, 95% CI -5.40 to -2.35) and fewer Beers drugs per participant (two studies; mean difference -0.1, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.09) in the intervention group compared with the control group. Evidence of the effects of interventions on hospital admissions (five studies) and of medication-related problems (six studies) was conflicting. It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy, such as pharmaceutical care, resulted in clinically significant improvement; however, they appear beneficial in terms of reducing inappropriate prescribing.

Preoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Colorectal anastomotic leakage is a serious complication. Despite extensive research, no consensus on the most important preoperative risk factors exists. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients operated with colorectal resection. The databases MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL were searched for prospective observational studies on preoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage. Meta-analyses were performed on outcomes based on odds ratios (OR) from multivariate regression analyses. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for bias assessment within studies, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for quality assessment of evidence on outcome levels. This review included 23 studies evaluating 110,272 patients undergoing colorectal resection for cancer. The meta-analyses found that a low rectal anastomosis [OR = 3.26 (95% CI: 2.31-4.62)], male gender [OR = 1.48 (95% CI: 1.37-1.60)] and preoperative radiotherapy [OR = 1.65 (95% CI: 1.06-2.56)] may be risk factors for anastomotic leakage. Primarily as a result of observational design, the quality of evidence was regarded as moderate or low for these risk factors according to the GRADE approach. Based on the best available evidence, important preoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leakage have been identified. Knowledge on risk factors may influence treatment and procedure-related decisions, and possibly reduce the leakage rate.

Introduction to the GRADE approach for guideline development: considerations for physical therapist practice.

Practice guidelines (guidelines) have an increasing role in health care delivery and are being published more frequently. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) is an approach for guideline development. The GRADE approach has been adopted by multiple national and international organizations producing guidelines related to physical therapist care. The purpose of this article is to introduce physical therapists to the GRADE approach for guideline development. GRADE provides a consistent approach for guideline development and transparency in the communication of how the guidelines were developed and how the recommendations were reached, leading to informed choices by patients, clinicians, and policy makers in health care. GRADE leads to a clear distinction between the strength of the evidence and the recommendation. Both the direction (for or against) and the strength (weak or strong) of the recommendation are considered. For determining the strength of the recommendation, GRADE takes into account the quality of evidence, the balance of benefit and harm, uncertainty about or variability in patients' values and preferences, and uncertainty about whether the intervention is a wise use of resources. The GRADE approach has been used primarily with interventions and clinical questions and less often with questions related to diagnosis and prognosis. The frequency of publication of guidelines is increasing. To make informed choices in the health care system, physical therapists should understand how guidelines are developed. The GRADE approach has been adopted by national and international organizations that produce guidelines relevant to physical therapist practice. Understanding the GRADE approach will enable physical therapists to make informed clinical choices.

Measuring GFR: A Systematic Review

No comprehensive systematic review of the accuracy of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement methods using renal inulin clearance as reference has been published. Systematic review with meta-analysis of cross-sectional diagnostic studies. Published original studies and systematic reviews in any population. Index and reference measurements conducted within 48 hours; at least 15 participants studied; GFR markers measured in plasma or urine; plasma clearance calculation algorithm verified in another study; tubular secretion of creatinine had not been blocked by medicines. Endogenous creatinine clearance; renal or plasma clearance of chromium 51-labeled ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (51Cr-EDTA), diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA), iohexol, and iothalamate; and plasma clearance of inulin. Renal inulin clearance measured under continuous inulin infusion and urine collection. Mean bias <10%, median bias <5%, the proportion of errors in the index measurements that did not exceed 30% (P30) ≥80%, and P10 ≥50% were set as requirements for sufficient accuracy. Based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, the quality of evidence across studies was rated for each index method. Renal clearance of iothalamate measured GFR with sufficient accuracy (strong evidence). Renal and plasma clearance of 51Cr-EDTA and plasma clearance of iohexol were sufficiently accurate to measure GFR (moderately strong evidence). Renal clearance of DTPA, renal clearance of iohexol, and plasma clearance of inulin had sufficient accuracy (limited evidence). Endogenous creatinine clearance was an inaccurate method (strong evidence), as was plasma clearance of DTPA (limited evidence). The evidence to determine the accuracy of plasma iothalamate clearance was insufficient. With the exception of plasma clearance of inulin, only renal clearance methods had P30 >90%. The included studies were few and most were old and small, which may limit generalizability. Requirements for sufficient accuracy may depend on clinical setting. At least moderately strong evidence suggests that renal clearance of 51Cr-EDTA or iothalamate and plasma clearance of 51Cr-EDTA or iohexol are sufficiently accurate methods to measure GFR.

International ERS/ATS guidelines on definition, evaluation and treatment of severe asthma

Severe or therapy-resistant asthma is increasingly recognised as a major unmet need. A Task Force, supported by the European Respiratory Society and American Thoracic Society, reviewed the definition and provided recommendations and guidelines on the evaluation and treatment of severe asthma in children and adults. A literature review was performed, followed by discussion by an expert committee according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for development of specific clinical recommendations. When the diagnosis of asthma is confirmed and comorbidities addressed, severe asthma is defined as asthma that requires treatment with high dose inhaled corticosteroids plus a second controller and/or systemic corticosteroids to prevent it from becoming "uncontrolled" or that remains "uncontrolled" despite this therapy. Severe asthma is a heterogeneous condition consisting of phenotypes such as eosinophilic asthma. Specific recommendations on the use of sputum eosinophil count and exhaled nitric oxide to guide therapy, as well as treatment with anti-IgE antibody, methotrexate, macrolide antibiotics, antifungal agents and bronchial thermoplasty are provided. Coordinated research efforts for improved phenotyping will provide safe and effective biomarker-driven approaches to severe asthma therapy.

Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

BackgroundOpioids are prescribed frequently and increasingly for the management of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Current systematic reviews have a number of limitations, leaving uncertainty with regard to the benefits and harms associated with opioid therapy for CNCP. We propose to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence for using opioids in the treatment of CNCP and the risk of associated adverse events.Methods and designEligible trials will include those that randomly allocate patients with CNCP to treatment with any opioid or any non-opioid control group. We will use the guidelines published by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to inform the outcomes that we collect and present. We will use the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to evaluate confidence in the evidence on an outcome-by-outcome basis. Teams of reviewers will independently and in duplicate assess trial eligibility, abstract data, and assess risk of bias among eligible trials. To ensure interpretability of our results, we will present risk differences and measures of relative effect for all outcomes reported and these will be based on anchor-based minimally important clinical differences, when available. We will conduct a priori defined subgroup analyses consistent with current best practices.DiscussionOur review will evaluate both the effectiveness and the adverse events associated with opioid use for CNCP, evaluate confidence in the evidence using the GRADE approach, and prioritize patient-important outcomes with a focus on functional gains guided by IMMPACT recommendations. Our results will facilitate evidence-based management of patients with CNCP and identify key areas for future research.Trial registrationOur protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42012003023), http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO.

The Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Self-Assessment

In 2005, after many years of discussion about whether or not The Endocrine Society (TES) should produce Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), TES Council approved a carefully designed program to produce 2 to 4 high-quality CPGs each year. TES has published 20 CPGs to date (1), and several more are expected to be published in the next 2 years. Since its inception, the CPG program has been unique in many ways. First, a highly regulated pathway on the route to publication (Figure 1) permits the selection, review, and vetting of CPGs at multiple levels, including a final peer and editorial review at the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism (JCEM). Second, the guidelines have been selected and produced without support from pharmaceutical or device-manufacturing companies. Third, all CPG expert panels have included at least 1 international member. Fourth, all CPGs have been translated into patient versions. Fifth, the CPGs are routinely reviewed and updated every 3 years. Finally, TES adopted the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for evaluating the evidence and producing recommendations (2). The GRADE Working Group began as an international effort to resolve confusion about how to best and most clearly rate evidence and express recommendations. Many governmental organizations and professional societies use the GRADE approach, including the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the American College of Physicians, and UpToDate in the United States; the National Institute for Clinical Excellence and the British Medical Journal in the United Kingdom; and the World Health Organization (3). Although there are multiple systems of grading evidence, the GRADE method is the only one that rates the strength of the recommendation (Strong or Weak) based on a balance of benefits vs harms, the confidence in the magnitude of estimated effect on an outcome, and the weighing of patient values and preferences. Although this method allows for Strong recommendations to be made with low (L) or very low (VL) levels of evidence and vice versa, this should not be a frequent occurrence. TES engaged the Knowledge and Evaluation Research (KER) Unit at the Mayo Clinic to provide methodological assistance to each of the CPG expert panels, whose expertise generally is in clinical medicine and not in methodology or epidemiology. In this issue of JCEM, members of the KER Unit have undertaken a unique exercise—assessing the appropriateness of 357 recommendations contained in all 17 CPGs that were published by TES between 2006 and 2011 (4). Their major finding was that 206 of the 357 recommendations were Strong, of which 121 were based on L/VL levels of evidence. Of the 121, 53 were in categories such as “sensible alternatives do not exist” or recommend “additional research.” KER Unit members then retrospectively applied a recently published schema by the GRADE Working Group of paradigmatic situations where Strong recommendations with L/VL evidence might be appropriate (5). Using this new taxonomy of paradigmatic situations to determine the appropriateness of the remaining 68 Strong recommendations that were based on L/VL levels of evidence, they found that it was appropriately applied to 35 recommendations and inappropriately applied to 33 (6 –16).

Making the use of psychotropic drugs more rational through the development of GRADE recommendations in specialist mental healthcare

IntroductionIn recent years the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology has often been used by international or national health authorities, or scientific societies, for developing evidence-based treatment recommendations. However, the GRADE approach has never been used by practicing physicians who aim at harmonizing their prescribing behaviours paying due attention to the best available evidence. This paper describes the experience of a working group of psychiatrists who adopted the GRADE approach to develop clinical recommendations on the use of psychotropic drugs in specialist mental healthcare.Case descriptionThe project was conducted in the Department of Mental Health of Verona, Italy, a city located in the north of Italy. At the beginning of 2012, psychiatrists with a specific interest in the rational use of psychotropic drugs were identified and appointed as members of a Guideline Development Group (GDG). The first task of the GDG was the identification of controversial areas in the use of psychotropic drugs, the definition of scoping questions, and the identification of outcomes of interest. The GDG was supported by a scientific secretariat, who searched the evidence, identified one or more systematic reviews matching the scoping questions, and drafted GRADE tables.Discussion and evaluationOn the basis of efficacy, acceptability, tolerability and safety data, considering the risk of bias and confidence in estimates, and taking also into consideration preferences, values and practical aspects in favour and against the intervention under scrutiny, a draft recommendation with its strength was formulated and agreed by GDG members. Recommendations were submitted for consideration to all specialists of the Department, discussed in two plenary sessions open to the whole staff, and finally approved at the end of 2012.ConclusionThe present project of guideline development raised several challenging and innovating aspects, including a “bottom-up” approach, as it was motivated by reasons that found agreement among specialists, those who developed the recommendations were those who were supposed to follow them, and values, preferences and feasibility issues were considered paying due attention to local context variables.

Canadian Society of Nephrology Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ESRD Treated With Intensive Hemodialysis

Intensive (longer and more frequent) hemodialysis has emerged as an alternative to conventional hemodialysis for the treatment of patients with end-stage renal disease. However, given the differences in dialysis delivery and models of care associated with intensive dialysis, alternative approaches to patient management may be required. The purpose of this work was to develop a clinical practice guideline for the Canadian Society of Nephrology. We applied the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for guideline development and performed targeted systematic reviews and meta-analysis (when appropriate) to address prioritized clinical management questions. We included studies addressing the treatment of patients with end-stage renal disease with short daily (≥5 days per week, <3 hours per session), long (3-4 days per week, ≥5.5 hours per session), or long-frequent (≥5 days per week, ≥5.5 hours per session) hemodialysis. We included clinical trials and observational studies with or without a control arm (1990 and later). Based on a prioritization exercise, 6 interventions of interest included optimal vascular access type, buttonhole cannulation, antimicrobial prophylaxis for buttonhole cannulation, closed connector devices, and dialysate calcium and dialysate phosphate additives for patients receiving intensive hemodialysis. We developed 6 recommendations addressing the interventions of interest. Overall quality of the evidence was very low and all recommendations were conditional. We provide detailed commentaries to guide in shared decision making. The main limitation was the very low overall quality of evidence that precluded strong recommendations. Most included studies were small single-arm observational studies. Three randomized controlled trials were applicable, but provided only indirect evidence. Published information for patient values and preference was lacking. In conclusion, we provide 6 recommendations for the practice of intensive hemodialysis. However, due to very low-quality evidence, all recommendations were conditional. We therefore also highlight priorities for future research.

Grading clinical guidelines for the use of transmucosal immediate-release fentanyl products in breakthrough pain

Pain is a complex symptom that is commonly feared in palliative care owing to its significant effects on patients' quality of life (QoL), and is directly associated with morbidity. More specifically, the management of breakthrough pain (BTP) is particularly important. Opioids play a major part in the management of BTP, and the various transmucosal immediate-release fentanyl (TIRF) products are a common treatment choice. This paper considers the strength of the evidence underlying recommendations regarding the use of TIRF. Failure to consider the quality of evidence in practice can lead to misguided recommendations. Guidelines should therefore be used to inform clinicians of the quality of the underlying evidence and whether recommendations are strong or weak. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach is increasingly being adopted worldwide as it provides a system for rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations that is clear, comprehensive, transparent, and practical. This paper adopts the GRADE approach to assess the strength of recommendations made in a 2011 review by Zeppetella in order to develop guidelines for the use of TIRF. The recommendations include that TIRF products can be considered for first-line treatment and that they should be individualised to patients who are on a background opioid.

Current experience with applying the GRADE approach to public health interventions: an empirical study.

BackgroundThe Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach has been adopted by many national and international organisations as a systematic and transparent framework for evidence-based guideline development. With reference to an ongoing debate in the literature and within public health organisations, this study reviews current experience with the GRADE approach in rating the quality of evidence in the field of public health and identifies challenges encountered.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with individuals/groups that have applied the GRADE approach in the context of systematic reviews or guidelines in the field of public health, as well as with representatives of groups or organisations that actively decided against its use. We initially contacted potential participants by email. Responses were obtained by telephone interview or email, and written interview summaries were validated with participants. We analysed data across individual interviews to distil common themes and challenges.ResultsBased on 25 responses, we undertook 18 interviews and obtained 15 in-depth responses relating to specific systematic reviews or guideline projects; a majority of the latter were contributed by groups within the World Health Organization. All respondents that have used the GRADE approach appreciated the systematic and transparent process of assessing the quality of the evidence. However, respondents reported a range of minor and major challenges relating to complexity of public health interventions, choice of outcomes and outcome measures, ability to discriminate between different types of observational studies, use of non-epidemiological evidence, GRADE terminology and the GRADE and guideline development process. Respondents’ suggestions to make the approach more applicable to public health interventions included revisiting terminology, offering better guidance on how to apply GRADE to complex interventions and making modifications to the current grading scheme.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that GRADE principles are applicable to public health and well-received but also highlight common challenges. They provide a starting point for exploring options for improvements and, where applicable, testing these across different types of public health interventions. Several public health organisations are currently testing GRADE, and the GRADE Working Group is eager to engage with these groups to find ways to address concerns.

Epidural Corticosteroid Injections in the Management of Sciatica

Existing guidelines and systematic reviews provide inconsistent recommendations on epidural corticosteroid injections for sciatica. Key limitations of existing reviews are the inclusion of trials with active controls of unknown efficacy and failure to provide an estimate of the size of the treatment effect. To determine the efficacy of epidural corticosteroid injections for sciatica compared with placebo. International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy of epidural corticosteroid injections in participants with sciatica. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Leg pain, back pain, and disability were converted to common scales from 0 (no pain or disability) to 100 (worst possible pain or disability). Thresholds for clinically important change in the range of 10 to 30 have been proposed for these outcomes. Effects were calculated for short-term (>2 weeks but ≤3 months) and long-term (≥12 months) follow-up. Data were pooled with a random-effects model, and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used in summary conclusions. Twenty-five published reports (23 trials) were included. The pooled results showed a significant, although small, effect of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo for leg pain in the short term (mean difference, -6.2 [95% CI, -9.4 to -3.0]) and also for disability in the short term (mean difference, -3.1 [CI, -5.0 to -1.2]). The long-term pooled effects were smaller and not statistically significant. The overall quality of evidence according to the GRADE classification was rated as high. The review included only English-language trials and could not incorporate dichotomous outcome measures into the analysis. The available evidence suggests that epidural corticosteroid injections offer only short-term relief of leg pain and disability for patients with sciatica. The small size of the treatment effects, however, raises questions about the clinical utility of this procedure in the target population. None.

Estimating benefits and harms of screening across subgroups: the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care integrates the GRADE approach and overcomes minor challenges

ObjectiveThis paper describes the integration of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach into their clinical preventive guideline development process by the new Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Study DesignThe GRADE approach focused the analytic framework and key questions on patient-important benefits and harms related to screening that incorporated detection, treatment, and follow-up. It also led to an explicit consideration of values and preferences and resource implications on the basis of the recommendations. ResultsThere are challenges, however, in incorporating the GRADE approach to clinical prevention, as the randomized controlled trials in this field have needed to be very large and of long duration, given the rare occurrence of primary outcome events in asymptomatic individuals. We provide examples of how we met these challenges in relation to developing clinical guidelines for screening for breast cancer, cervical cancer, diabetes, hypertension, and depression in primary care settings. ConclusionThe focus on the patient-important outcomes was helpful in estimating effectiveness of screening approaches and providing explicit detailing of the basis of our recommendations across subgroups.