Immune Globulin for Patients with Primary Immune Deficiency: An Evidence Based Practice Guideline

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 4705-4705
Author(s):  
Nadine Shehata ◽  
Heather Ann Hume ◽  
Valerie Palda ◽  
David Anderson ◽  
Tom Bowen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: The original use of immune globulin (IG) was for replacement in patients with primary immune deficiency (PID). The evidence supporting this stems from the 19650s; however there have not been any rigorously developed evidence based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the use of IG for PID. In 2007, Canadian Blood Services and the National Advisory Committee on Blood and Blood Products in Canada convened a panel of Canadian immunologists and a methodologist to develop a CPG for the use of IG in patients with PID. The objectives of this guideline are to examine the evidence for the use of IG in patients who have PID and to provide guidance for practitioners involved in the care of PID patients and transfusion medicine specialists on the use of IG. Methods: The panel identified key clinical questions and a systematic, expert and bibliography literature search up to July 2008 was conducted to ensure all relevant publications were included. The panel generated recommendations based on the evidence. The levels of evidence and grading of recommendations were adapted from the Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care. To validate conclusions and recommendations, the practice guideline will be sent to immunologists internationally and to a patient representative in September 2008. The guideline will be disseminated to all immunologists, internists and pediatricians in Canada to aid implementation of the guideline. The National Advisory Committee of Blood and Blood Products in Canada will assess the performance of the guideline and will renew the guideline at timely intervals. Results and Conclusions: The panel identified the following key clinical questions: what is the prevalence of the PIDs that require IG; does treatment with IG improve morbidity and mortality; and what criteria should be used to monitor the effectiveness of IVIG. The literature search was conducted in August 2007 and updated to July 2008. 1087 citations were reviewed. 101 reports, 1 systematic review and 3 consensus documents/guidelines were included. Current estimates suggest PID is under-diagnosed. Although more than 75% of patients require IG at some point in their treatment, the actual incidence of requiring IG is unknown. There is ample evidence that IG reduces infections, hospitalization and days lost from work/school. There is some evidence to suggest that IG may ameliorate chronic illnesses in patients with PID however, there is no data of the effect of IG on malignancy and insufficient data on the effect of IG on autoimmune disease in this patient population to make a recommendation. Quality of life (QoL) has not been adequately assessed in the literature; however the reduction in infections and hospitalizations likely translates to an improved QoL. Although, there is no evidence to suggest clinical superiority of one IVIG formulation over another, for patients with autoimmune manifestations and PID, there is insufficient evidence that subcutaneous IG is equivalent to IVIG. The vaccination of these patients is an evolving field. Due to the complex nature of the management of patients with PID, the panel recommended assessment by an immunologist prior to the initiation of IG and monitoring by a comprehensive care clinic. Clinical outcomes such as frequency of infections, hospitalization, days missed from school/work should be used to monitor the effectiveness of IVIG. Specific recommendations for dosing and interval of IG therapy were made within the guideline based on the literature The development of a national registry for patients with primary immune deficiency, and the development of a surveillance system for adverse events from IG particularly infections were considered priorities for future development.

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S28-S50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Shehata ◽  
Valerie Palda ◽  
Tom Bowen ◽  
Elie Haddad ◽  
Thomas B. Issekutz ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
John C. Norcross ◽  
Thomas P. Hogan ◽  
Gerald P. Koocher ◽  
Lauren A. Maggio

This chapter provides a guide to the first core skill of evidence-based practice (EBP): formulating a specific, answerable question. This skill lies at the heart of accessing the best available research. To practice EBP clinicians must first form an answerable clinical question; otherwise they will likely incur frustration and waste time once they embark on their literature search. The chapter introduces several types of questions, including background and foreground questions. The chapter also provides step-by-step instructions for formulating clinical questions using the PICO format, which encourages clinicians to identify the patient, intervention, comparison, and outcomes relevant to the patient. It concludes with a discussion of how to ensure that questions reflect the patient’s preferences and how to prioritize questions.


2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 372-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joycelyn Desarno ◽  
Irene Sandate ◽  
Kay Green ◽  
Priscilla Chavez

The vast majority of infants in the NICU receive peripheral intravenous (PIV) therapy for administration of fluids, nutrition, medications, and blood products. The potential complications of infiltration and extravasation are common in this population. Consequences of inf.ltration and extravasation may be prevented or mitigated by early detection and prompt treatment. In addition, innovative therapies for wound care are constantly evolving. In order to improve outcomes, a practice guideline for intravenous (IV) infiltration prevention, management, and treatment is presented based on literature review and consultation with wound care experts. The guideline includes preventive measures, standardized IV assessment, staging, an algorithm outlining injury, and wound care recommendations.


Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 4666-4666
Author(s):  
Nadine Shehata ◽  
Heather Ann Hume ◽  
Valerie Palda ◽  
Ralph Meyer ◽  
Patricia Campbell ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Utilization of intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) is increasing in Canada and worldwide despite few and no new labeled indications. In 2007, Canadian Blood Services in collaboration with the National Advisory Committee on Blood and Blood Products convened a panel of solid organ transplantation (SOT) experts (kidney, heart, lung, and liver) and methodologists to develop an evidence-based practice guideline for the use of IVIG in patients undergoing SOT. The objectives of this guideline are to examine the evidence for the use of IVIG in patients who are candidates for SOT and are sensitized to HLA or ABO antigens, to provide guidance for Canadian practitioners involved in the care of these patients and transfusion medicine specialists on the use of IVIG. Methods: The panel identified clinical areas of SOT that would benefit from treatment with IVIG and generated key clinical questions. A systematic, expert and bibliography literature search up to July 2008 was conducted to ensure all relevant publications were included. The panel generated recommendations based on the evidence. The levels of evidence and grading of recommendations were adapted from the Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care. To validate conclusions and recommendations, the practice guideline will be sent to physicians involved in solid organ transplantation in Canada and a patient representative. Recommendations from practitioner feedback will be incorporated, and the guideline will be disseminated to all physicians involved in the care of patients receiving solid organ transplantation in Canada to aid implementation of the guideline. The National Advisory Committee of Blood and Blood Products in Canada will subsequently assess the performance of the guideline and will renew the guideline at timely intervals. Results and Conclusions: The research questions developed by the panel were: Is there evidence that the use of IVIG reduces morbidity and mortality for patients undergoing SOT who are sensitized (HLA or ABO) in the perioperative setting and are sensitized experiencing acute graft rejection or experiencing chronic graft rejection? 791 citations were retrieved, and panel members identified 3 additional citations. 51 reports and a systematic review were used for this guideline. These reports were limited by inconsistent definitions of sensitization, inconsistent reporting of the type and titre of the antibody, the assays used to detect HLA antibodies, the response criteria and dosing schedules for IVIG. Thus, a consensus process was used to account for the poor evidence. The use of IVIG was associated with decreased sensitization and acceptable morbidity and mortality in living donor kidney transplantation. IVIG has been used with several other modalities for ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation and it was difficult from the existing literature to separate outcomes based on a single modality. There was also limited data on the perioperative use of IVIG in renal transplantation. IVIG was shown to be effective in combination with plasmapheresis for acute antibody mediated rejection of the kidney; however the role of IVIG was not clear for other forms of rejection. There were also several methodological limitations in the literature assessing IVIG for cardiac transplantation and only limited data were available to assess the use of IVIG for lung or liver transplantation. Future studies are needed to define the role of IVIG in solid organ transplantation and should capture the following elements: impact on antibody (specificity and titres), transplant rates, time to transplantation, graft function, graft survival, and rejection (cellular and antibody mediated).


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshihiro Abiko ◽  
Hirofumi Matsuoka ◽  
Itsuo Chiba ◽  
Akira Toyofuku

Patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) complain of medically unexplained toothache. No evidence-based diagnostic criteria or treatment guidelines are yet available. The present paper addresses seven clinical questions about AO based on current knowledge in the literature and discusses diagnostic criteria and guidelines for treatment and management. The questions are (i) What is the prevalence of AO in the community? (ii) What psychological problems are experienced by patients with AO? (iii) Are there any comorbidities of AO? (iv) Is local anesthesia effective for the relief of pain in AO? (v) Are there any characteristic symptoms of AO other than spontaneous pain? (vi) Are antidepressants effective for treatment of AO? (vii) Are anticonvulsants effective for treatment of AO? Our literature search provided answers for these questions; however, there is insufficient evidence-based data to establish guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AO. Overall, some diagnostic criteria for neuropathic pain and persistent dentoalveolar pain disorder may be applied to AO patients. The patient's psychogenic background should always be considered in the treatment and/or management of AO. The clinicians may need to treat AO patients using Patient-Oriented Evidence that Matters approach.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document