scholarly journals How to adapt existing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines: a case example with smoking cessation guidelines in Canada

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e016124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Selby ◽  
Katie Hunter ◽  
Jess Rogers ◽  
Kelly Lang-Robertson ◽  
Sophie Soklaridis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Local Context ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Topic Area ◽  
Independent Expert

ObjectiveTo develop and encourage the adoption of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for smoking cessation in Canada by engaging stakeholders in the adaptation of existing high-quality CPGs using principles of the ADAPTE framework.MethodsAn independent expert body in guideline review conducted a review and identified six existing CPGs, which met a priori criteria for quality and potential applicability to the local context. Summary statements were extracted and assigned a grade of recommendation and level of evidence by a second expert panel. Regional knowledge exchange brokers recruited additional stakeholders to build a multidisciplinary network of over 800 clinicians, researchers and decision-makers from across Canada. This interprofessional network and other stakeholders were offered various opportunities to provide input on the guideline both online and in person. We actively encouraged end-user input into the development and adaptation of the guidelines to ensure applicability to various practice settings and to promote adoption.ResultsThe final guideline contained 24 summary statements along with supporting clinical considerations, across six topic area sections. The guideline was adopted by various provincial/territorial and national government and non-governmental organisations.ConclusionsThis method can be applied in other jurisdictions to adapt existing high-quality smoking cessation CPGs to the local context and to facilitate subsequent adoption by various stakeholders.

scholarly journals Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Japan: JSH Consensus Statements and Recommendations 2021 Update

Liver Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-43
Author(s):  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Yusuke Kawamura ◽  
Kiyoshi Hasegawa ◽  
Ryosuke Tateishi ◽  
Kazuya Kariyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Clinical Practices ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Consensus Statements

The Clinical Practice Manual for Hepatocellular Carcinoma was published based on evidence confirmed by the Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hepatocellular Carcinoma along with consensus opinion among a Japan Society of Hepatology (JSH) expert panel on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Since the JSH Clinical Practice Guidelines are based on original articles with extremely high levels of evidence, expert opinions on HCC management in clinical practice or consensus on newly developed treatments are not included. However, the practice manual incorporates the literature based on clinical data, expert opinion, and real-world clinical practice currently conducted in Japan to facilitate its use by clinicians. Alongside each revision of the JSH Guidelines, we issued an update to the manual, with the first edition of the manual published in 2007, the second edition in 2010, the third edition in 2015, and the fourth edition in 2020, which includes the 2017 edition of the JSH Guideline. This article is an excerpt from the fourth edition of the HCC Clinical Practice Manual focusing on pathology, diagnosis, and treatment of HCC. It is designed as a practical manual different from the latest version of the JSH Clinical Practice Guidelines. This practice manual was written by an expert panel from the JSH, with emphasis on the consensus statements and recommendations for the management of HCC proposed by the JSH expert panel. In this article, we included newly developed clinical practices that are relatively common among Japanese experts in this field, although all of their statements are not associated with a high level of evidence, but these practices are likely to be incorporated into guidelines in the future. To write this article, coauthors from different institutions drafted the content and then critically reviewed each other’s work. The revised content was then critically reviewed by the Board of Directors and the Planning and Public Relations Committee of JSH before publication to confirm the consensus statements and recommendations. The consensus statements and recommendations presented in this report represent measures actually being conducted at the highest-level HCC treatment centers in Japan. We hope this article provides insight into the actual situation of HCC practice in Japan, thereby affecting the global practice pattern in the management of HCC.

Level of Scientific Evidence Underlying Recommendations from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hematologic Malignancies: Are We Moving Forward?

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 32-32
Author(s):  
Aakash Desai ◽  
Harry E Fuentes ◽  
Sri Harsha Tella ◽  
Caleb J Scheckel ◽  
Thejaswi Poonacha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
National Comprehensive Cancer Network ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Nccn Guidelines ◽  
Therapeutic Recommendations ◽  
Cancer Network

Background: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are the most comprehensive and widely used standard for clinical care in malignant hematology by clinicians and payers in the US. The level of scientific evidence in NCCN guidelines for malignant hematological conditions has not been recently investigated. We describe the distribution of categories of evidence and consensus (EC) among the 10 most common hematologic malignancies with regard to recommendations for staging, initial and salvage therapy, and surveillance. Methods: NCCN uses a system of guideline development distinct from other major professional organizations. The NCCN definitions for EC are: category I, high level of evidence such as randomized controlled trials with uniform consensus; category IIA, lower level of evidence with uniform consensus; category IIB, lower level of evidence without a uniform consensus but with no major disagreement; and category III, any level of evidence but with major disagreement. We compared our results with previously published results from 2011 guidelines. Results: Total recommendations increased by 16.6% from 1160 (2011) to 1353 (2020). Of the 1353 recommendations, Category 1, 2A, 2B and 3 EC were 5%, 91%, 4%, 1% while in 2011 they were 3%, 93%, 4% and 0% respectively. Recommendations with category 1 EC were found in all guidelines, except for Burkitt's Lymphoma. 6.3% of therapeutic recommendations were category 1 EC with the majority (56.4%) pertaining to initial therapy. Guidelines with highest proportions of therapeutic recommendations with category 1 EC were Multiple Myeloma (12.4%), CLL/SLL (6.9%) and AML (5.6%). Between 2011 and 2020, the proportion of category I recommendations increased significantly only in Follicular lymphoma and CLL/SLL. No category 1 EC recommendations existed in staging or surveillance. Conclusion: Recommendations issued in the 2020 NCCN guidelines are largely developed from lower levels of evidence but with uniform expert opinion. Despite the major advances in hematology in the past decade, this is largely unchanged. Our study underscores the urgent need and available opportunities to expand the current evidence base in malignant hematological disorders which forms the platform for clinical practice guidelines. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals The Italian Society of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gout

Reumatismo ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (S1) ◽  
pp. 50-79
Author(s):  
N. Ughi ◽  
I. Prevete ◽  
R. Ramonda ◽  
L. Cavagna ◽  
G. Filippou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Italian Society ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Diagnosis And Management ◽  
Increased Risk

Gout is a chronic disease with an increased risk of premature death related to comorbidities. Treatment of gout has proved suboptimal and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are expected to have a key role in achieving improvement. Since new evidence has become available, the Italian Society for Rheumatology (SIR) has been prompted to update the 2013 recommendations on the diagnosis and management of gout. The framework of the Guidelines International Network Adaptation Working Group was adopted to identify, appraise (AGREE II), synthesize, and customize the existing gout CPGs to the needs of the Italian healthcare context. The task force consisting of rheumatologists from the SIR Epidemiology Unit and a committee with experience on gout identified key health questions to guide a systematic literature review. The target audience includes physicians and health professionals who manage gout in practice, and the target population includes adult patients suspected or diagnosed as having gout. These recommendations were finally rated by an external multi-disciplinary commission. From a systematic search in databases (Medline, Embase) and grey literature, 8 CPGs were selected and appraised by two independent raters. Combining evidence and statements from these CPGs and clinical expertise, 14 recommendations were developed and graded according to the level of evidence. The statements and potential impact on clinical practice were discussed and assessed. These revised recommendations are intended to provide guidance for the diagnosis and the treatment of gout and to disseminate the best evidence-based healthcare for this disease.

scholarly journals Critical appraisal and comparison of recommendations of clinical practice guidelines for treatment of schizophrenia in children and adolescents: a methodological survey protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e038646
Author(s):  
Maíra Ramos Alves ◽  
Cristiane de Cássia Bergamaschi ◽  
Flávia Blaseck Sorrilha ◽  
Izabela Fulone ◽  
Silvio Barberato-Filho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Future Research ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Over Time

IntroductionThe number of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have increased substantially mainly in the paediatric area of mental health. However, little is known about the quality or how recommendations for the treatment of disorders such as schizophrenia in children and adolescents have changed over time. The aim of this study will be to assess the quality of the development of CPGs for the treatment and management of schizophrenia in children and adolescents over time using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and to compare the recommendations and interventions described in these documents.Methods and analysisCPGs will be identified using a prospective protocol through a systematic search of multiple databases (Medline, Embase, Health Systems Evidence, Epistemonikos, Lilacs, etc) and guideline websites from 2004 to December 2020. The quality of the guidelines will be assessed by three reviewers, independently using the AGREE II. CPGs will be considered of high-quality if they scored ≥60% in four or more domains of the AGREE II instrument. Non-parametric tests will be used to test for the change of quality over time. We will summarise the different evidence grading systems and compare the recommendations.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required since it is a literature-based study. Future results of the research can be submitted for publication in scientific journals of high impact, peer reviewed and also published in national and international conferences. The results derived from this study will contribute to the improvement of health institutions and policies, informing about existing recommendation guidelines and about deficiencies and qualities found in those. This study may also identify key areas for future research. This study may guide the search and choice for high quality CPGs by health policy makers and health professionals and subsidise future adaptations.Protocol registration numberCRD42020164899.

scholarly journals What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? Eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 79-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Lin ◽  
Louise Wiles ◽  
Rob Waller ◽  
Roger Goucke ◽  
Yusuf Nagree ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Surgical Care ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Evidence Database

ObjectivesTo identify common recommendations for high-quality care for the most common musculoskeletal (MSK) pain sites encountered by clinicians in emergency and primary care (spinal (lumbar, thoracic and cervical), hip/knee (including osteoarthritis [OA] and shoulder) from contemporary, high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).DesignSystematic review, critical appraisal and narrative synthesis of MSK pain CPG recommendations.Eligibility criteriaIncluded MSK pain CPGs were written in English, rated as high quality, published from 2011, focused on adults and described development processes. Excluded CPGs were for: traumatic MSK pain, single modalities (eg, surgery), traditional healing/medicine, specific disease processes (eg, inflammatory arthropathies) or those that required payment.Data sourcesFour scientific databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Physiotherapy Evidence Database) and four guideline repositories.Results6232 records were identified, 44 CPGs were appraised and 11 were rated as high quality (low back pain: 4, OA: 4, neck: 2 and shoulder: 1). We identified 11 recommendations for MSK pain care: ensure care is patient centred, screen for red flag conditions, assess psychosocial factors, use imaging selectively, undertake a physical examination, monitor patient progress, provide education/information, address physical activity/exercise, use manual therapy only as an adjunct to other treatments, offer high-quality non-surgical care prior to surgery and try to keep patients at work.ConclusionThese 11 recommendations guide healthcare consumers, clinicians, researchers and policy makers to manage MSK pain. This should improve the quality of care of MSK pain.

scholarly journals A Critical Approach to Clinical Practice Guidelines

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 505-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
John K Marshall
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Critical Approach ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Improve Patient

The rate of publication of clinical practice guidelines for the management of common medical illnesses continues to accelerate. The appropriate dissemination and uptake of high quality practice guidelines can synthesize evidence, improve patient outcomes and enhance the efficiency of health care delivery. However, the methodological rigour and relevance of the growing number of publications labelled ’clinical practice guidelines’ vary widely. Health care payers, providers and advocates must learn to appraise and interpret guideline recommendations critically. A simple and practical nine-question approach to evaluating the quality, relevance and effectiveness of clinical practice guidelines is presented.

scholarly journals Adapting clinical practice guidelines to local context and assessing barriers to their use

2009 ◽  
Vol 182 (2) ◽  
pp. E78-E84 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. B. Harrison ◽  
F. Legare ◽  
I. D. Graham ◽  
B. Fervers
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Local Context
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document