Search

This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (>= 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts >= 300 cells/mm(3). Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment. (C) 2021 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients' Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis, 2) determination of the risk level, 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy, and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a more detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity. (c) 2021 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Background Diagnostic mammography projections (DxMM) have been traditionally used in the assessment of women recalled after a suspicious screening mammogram. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) reduces the tissue overlap effect, thus improving image assessment. Some studies have suggested DBT might replace DxMM with at least equivalent performance. Objective To evaluate the replacement of DxMM with DBT in women recalled at screening. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify diagnostic paired cohort studies or RCTs comparing DBT vs DxMM, published in English that: reported accuracy outcomes, recruited women recalled for assessment at mammography screening, and included a reference standard. Subgroup analysis was performed over lesion characteristics. We provided pooled accuracy estimates and differences between tests using a quadrivariate model. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Results We included ten studies that reported specificity and sensitivity. One study included 7060 women while the remaining included between 52 and 738 women. DBT compared with DxMM showed a pooled difference for the sensitivity of 2% (95% CI 1%-3%) and a pooled difference for the specificity of 6% (95%CI 2%-11%). Restricting the analysis to the six studies that included women with microcalcification lesions gave similar results. In the context of a prevalence of 21% of breast cancer (BC) in recalled women, DBT probably detects 4 (95% CI 2-6) more BC cases and has 47 (95%CI 16-87) fewer false-positive results per 1000 assessments. The certainty of the evidence was moderate due to risk of bias. Conclusion The evidence in the assessment of screen-recalled findings with DBT is sparse and of moderate certainty. DBT probably has higher sensitivity and specificity than DxMM. Women, health care providers and policymakers might value as relevant the reduction of false-positive results and related fewer invasive diagnostic procedures with DBT, without missing BC cases.

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the second leading cause of nosocomial infection, and increases morbidity and mortality. It is currently classified into three groups: HAP not requiring artificial ventilation, HAP requiring artificial ventilation, and HAP acquired during artificial ventilation, also known as ventilator-acquired pneumonia (VAP). The latest guidelines for the management of HAP were published in 2016 (IDSA/ATS) and 2017 (ERS/ESCMID/ESICM and ALAT). The latest Spanish guidelines were published in Archivos de Bronconeumologia in 2011. American guidelines from 2016 and international guidelines from 2017 present their recommendations in a context of significantly increased resistance of both Gram-positive and, in particular, Gram-negative microorganisms to antibacterial agents. In 2019, SEPAR celebrated Pneumonia Year, and we felt that this was an appropriate time to update the guidelines published in 2011. Pulmonologists, intensive care specialists, infectious disease specialists, and methodology experts participated in drawing up this document, and agreed to use the following scheme: 1. Questions - Are the epidemiology and microbiology of HAP and VAP similar? - Are risk factors valid for predicting the etiology of HAP and VAP caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) microorganisms? - Are biomarkers effective for diagnosis and for guiding the duration of treatment? - What is the current algorithm for empirical treatment? - Does the duration of antibiotic treatment (7-8 days vs 14 days) affect patient outcome? - What is the most appropriate indication for the new antibiotics? 2. Each question contains the following sections: - Controversy - Evidence - Guidelines - Studies recommended for resolving controversy - A 100% consensus was reached by the experts for all guidelines. (C) 2020 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

The guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia, last published in 2010, have been updated to provide recommendations based on a critical summary of the latest literature to help health professionals make the best decisions in the care of immunocompetent adult patients. The methodology was based on 6 PICO questions (on etiological studies, assessment of severity and decision to hospitalize, antibiotic treatment and duration, and pneumococcal conjugate vaccination), agreed by consensus among a working group of pulmonologists and an expert in documentation science and methodology. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed for each PICO question, and these were evaluated in in-person meetings. The American Thoracic Society guidelines were published during the preparation of this paper, so the recommendations of this association were also evaluated. We concluded that the etiological source of the infection should be investigated in hospitalized patients who have suspected resistance or who fail to respond to treatment. Prognostic scales, such as PSI, CURB 65, and CRB65, are useful for assessing severity and the decision to hospitalize. Different antibiotic regimens are indicated, depending on the treatment setting - outpatient, hospital, or intensive care unit - and the resistance of PES microorganisms should be calculated. The minimum duration of antibiotic treatment should be 5 days, based on criteria of clinical stability. Finally, we reviewed the indication of the 13-valent conjugate vaccine in immunocompetent patients with risk factors and comorbidity. (C) 2020 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Background: Breast cancer (BC) clinical guidelines offer evidence-based recommendations to improve quality of healthcare for patients with or at risk of BC. Suboptimal adherence to recommendations has the potential to negatively affect population health. However, no study has systematically reviewed the impact of BC guideline adherence -as prognosis factor- on BC healthcare processes and health outcomes. The objectives are to analyse the impact of guideline adherence on health outcomes and on healthcare costs. Methods: We searched systematic reviews and primary studies in MEDLINE and Embase, conducted in European Union (EU) countries (inception to May 2019). Eligibility assessment, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by one author and crosschecked by a second. We used random-effects meta-analyses to examine the impact of guideline adherence on overall survival and disease-free survival, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. Results: We included 21 primary studies. Most were published during the last decade (90%), followed a retrospective cohort design (86%), focused on treatment guideline adherence (95%), and were at low (80%) or moderate (20%) risk of bias. Nineteen studies (95%) examined the impact of guideline adherence on health outcomes, while two (10%) on healthcare cost. Adherence to guidelines was associated with increased overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95%CI 0.59-0.76) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.35, 95%CI 0.15-0.82), representing 138 more survivors (96 more to 178 more) and 336 patients free of recurrence (73 more to 491 more) for every 1000 women receiving adherent CG treatment compared to those receiving non-adherent treatment at 5 years follow-up (moderate certainty). Adherence to treatment guidelines was associated with higher costs, but adherence to follow-up guidelines was associated with lower costs (low certainty). Conclusions: Our review of EU studies suggests that there is moderate certainty that adherence to BC guidelines is associated with an improved survival. BC guidelines should be rigorously implemented in the clinical setting. Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018092884). © 2020 The Author(s).

Neither breast cancer prevention and early-detection programs, nor their outcomes, are uniform across Europe. This article describes the rationale, methods, and process for development of the European Commission ( EC) Initiative on Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis Guidelines. To be consistent with standards set by the Institute of Medicine and others, the EC followed 6 general principles. First, the EC selected, via an open call, a panel with broad representation of areas of expertise. Second, it ensured that all recommendations were supported by systematic reviews. Third, the EC separately considered important subgroups of women, included patient advocates in the guidelines development group, and focused on good communication to inform women's decisions. Fourth, EC rules on conflicts of interest were followed and the GRADE ( Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to structure the process and minimize the influence of competing interests. Fifth, it focused its recommendations on outcomes that matter to women, and certainty of the evidence is rated for each. Sixth, the EC elicited stakeholder feedback to ensure that the recommendations remain up to date and relevant to practice. This article describes the approach and highlights ways of disseminating and adapting the recommendations both within and outside Europe, using innovative information technology tools.

Document Reviewers: Victor Aboyans (CPG Review Coordinator) (France), Antonio Vaz Carneiro (CPG Review Coordinator) (Portugal), Stephan Achenbach (Germany), Stefan Agewall (Norway), Yannick Allanore (France), Riccardo Asteggiano (Italy), Luigi Paolo Badano (Italy), Joan Albert Barbera (Spain), Helene Bouvaist (France), Hector Bueno (Spain), Robert A. Byrne (Germany), Scipione Carerj (Italy), Graca Castro (Portugal), Cetin Erol (Turkey), Volkmar Falk (Germany), Christian Funck-Brentano (France), Matthias Gorenflo (Germany), John Granton (Canada), Bernard Iung (France), David G. Kiely (UK), Paulus Kirchhof (Germany/UK), Barbro Kjellstrom (Sweden), Ulf Landmesser (Switzerland), John Lekakis (Greece), Christos Lionis (Greece), Gregory Y. H. Lip (UK), Stylianos E. Orfanos (Greece), Myung H. Park (USA), Massimo F. Piepoli (Italy), Piotr Ponikowski (Poland), Marie-Pierre Revel (France), David Rigau (ERS methodologist) (Switzerland), Stephan Rosenkranz (Germany), Heinz Voller (Germany), and Jose Luis Zamorano (Spain)

The most recent European guidelines and task force reports on hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) were published almost 10 years ago. Since then, further randomised clinical trials of HAP and VAP have been conducted and new information has become available. Studies of epidemiology, diagnosis, empiric treatment, response to treatment, new antibiotics or new forms of antibiotic administration and disease prevention have changed old paradigms. In addition, important differences between approaches in Europe and the USA have become apparent. The European Respiratory Society launched a project to develop new international guidelines for HAP and VAP. Other European societies, including the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, were invited to participate and appointed their representatives. The Latin American Thoracic Association was also invited. A total of 15 experts and two methodologists made up the panel. Three experts from the USA were also invited (Michael S. Niederman, Marin Kollef and Richard Wunderink). Applying the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, the panel selected seven PICO (population-intervention-comparison-outcome) questions that generated a series of recommendations for HAP/VAP diagnosis, treatment and prevention.

BACKGROUND: Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) who carry indwelling urinary catheters have an increased risk of urinary tract infection (UTI). Antiseptic silver alloy-coated (SAC) silicone urinary catheters prove to be a promising intervention to reduce UTIs; however, current evidence cannot be extrapolated to patients with SCI. PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of SAC urinary catheters for preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infections. DESIGN/SETTING: This is an open-label, multicenter (developed in Spain, Portugal, Chile, Turkey, and Italy), randomized clinical trial conducted in 14 hospitals from November 2012 to December 2015. PATIENT SAMPLE: Eligible patients were men or women with traumatic or medical SCI, aged >= 18 years, requiring an indwelling urinary catheter for at least 7 days. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of symptomatic UTIs. The secondary outcome included bacteremia in the urinary tract and adverse events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive a SAC urinary catheter (experimental group) or a standard catheter (control group) for at least 7 days. Data were compared using chi-squared test and also calculating the absolute risk difference with a 95% confidence interval. An adjusted analysis including different risk factors of UTI was performed. This study was mainly funded by La Marato de TV3 Foundation (grant number # 112210) and the European Clinical Research Infrastructures Network organization. The funders had no role in the interpretation or reporting of results. RESULTS: A total of 489 patients were included in the study, aged 55 years in the experimental group and aged 57 in the control group (p=.870); 72% were men; 43% were hospitalized patients, and 57% were outpatients (p=1.0). The most frequent cause of SCI was traumatic (73.75%), and the localization was mainly the cervical spine (42.74%). Most of the patients had an A score (complete spinal injury and no motor and sensory is preserved) on the ASIA scale (62.37%). The median time of urethral catheterization was 27 days in the experimental group and 28 days in the control group (p=.202). Eighteen patients (7.41%) in the experimental group and 19 in the control (7.72%) group had a symptomatic UTI (odds ratio [OR] 0.96 [0.49-1.87]). The adjusted analysis revealed no change in the results. Only three patients in the experimental group had bacteremia within the urinary tract. The experimental group presented more adverse events related to the use of a catheter than the control group (OR 0.03 [0.00-0.06]). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not support the routine use of indwelling antiseptic SAC silicone urinary catheters in patients with SCI. However, UTIs associated to long-term urinary catheter use remain a challenge and further investigations are still needed. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia is often confirmed with standard, albeit complex and expensive, tests. In many cases, however, the diagnosis remains difficult despite the array of sophisticated diagnostic tests. There is no "gold standard" reference test. Hence, a Task Force supported by the European Respiratory Society has developed this guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations on diagnostic testing, especially in light of new developments in such tests, and the need for robust diagnoses of patients who might enter randomised controlled trials of treatments. The guideline is based on pre-defined questions relevant for clinical care, a systematic review of the literature, and assessment of the evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. It focuses on clinical presentation, nasal nitric oxide, analysis of ciliary beat frequency and pattern by high-speed video-microscopy analysis, transmission electron microscopy, genotyping and immunofluorescence. It then used a modified Delphi survey to develop an algorithm for the use of diagnostic tests to definitively confirm and exclude the diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia; and to provide advice when the diagnosis was not conclusive. Finally, this guideline proposes a set of quality criteria for future research on the validity of diagnostic methods for primary ciliary dyskinesia.

Background: Women treated for breast cancer are followed-up for monitoring of treatment effectiveness and for detecting recurrences at an early stage. The type of follow-up received may affect women's reassurance and impact on their quality of life. Anxiety and depression among women with breast cancer has been described, but little is known about how the intensity of the follow-up can affect women's psychological status. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effects of intensive vs. less-intensive follow-up on different health outcomes, to determine what are women's preferences and values regarding the follow-up received, and also assess the costs of these different types of follow-up. Methods: A systematic review following standard Cochrane Collaboration methods was carried out to assess the efficacy of intensive follow-up versus non-intensive follow-up in breast cancer patients. Two additional reviews on women's preferences and economic evidence were also carried out. The search was performed up to January 2016 in: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PDQ, McMaster Health Systems Evidence, CENTRAL, and NHS EED (through The Cochrane Library). The quality of evidence was assessed by GRADE (for quantitative studies) and CerQUAL (for qualitative studies). Several outcomes including mortality, breast cancer recurrences, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Six randomised trials (corresponding to 3534 women) were included for the evaluation of health outcomes; three studies were included for women's values and preferences and four for an economic assessment. There is moderate certainty of evidence showing that intensive follow-up, including more frequent diagnostic tests or visits, does not have effects on 5-or 10-year overall mortality and recurrences in women with breast cancer, compared with less intensive follow-up. Regarding women's preferences and values, there was important variability among studies and within studies (low confidence due to risk of bias and inconsistency). Furthermore, intensive follow-up, as opposed to less intensive follow-up, is not likely to be cost-effective. Conclusions: Less intensive follow-up appears to be justified and can be recommended over intensive follow-up. Resources could thus be mobilised to other aspects of breast cancer care, or other areas of healthcare.

The clinical presentation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) varies widely, so treatment must be tailored according to the level of risk and phenotype. In 2012, the Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) first established pharmacological treatment regimens based on clinical phenotypes. These regimens were subsequently adopted by other national guidelines, and since then, have been backed up by new evidence. In this 2017 update, the original severity classification has been replaced by a much simpler risk classification (low or high risk), on the basis of lung function, dyspnea grade, and history of exacerbations, while determination of clinical phenotype is recommended only in high-risk patients. The same clinical phenotypes have been maintained: non-exacerbator, asthma-COPD overlap (ACO), exacerbator with emphysema, and exacerbator with bronchitis. Pharmacological treatment of COPD is based on bronchodilators, the only treatment recommended in low-risk patients. High-risk patients will receive different drugs in addition to bronchodilators, depending on their clinical phenotype. GesEPOC reflects a more individualized approach to COPD treatment, according to patient clinical characteristics and level of risk or complexity. (C) 2017 SEPAR. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Interferon-gamma release assays are widely used for the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection in Spain. However, there is no consensus on their application in specific clinical scenarios. To develop a guideline for their use, a panel of experts comprising specialists in infectious diseases, respiratory diseases, microbiology, pediatrics and preventive medicine, together with a methodologist, conducted a systematic literature search, summarized the findings, rated the quality of the evidence, and formulated recommendations following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations of Assessment Development and Evaluations) methodology. This document provides evidence-based guidance on the use of interferon-gamma release assays for the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection in patients at the risk of tuberculosis or suspected of having active disease. The guidelines will be applicable to specialist and primary care, and public health. (C) 2016 Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. and Sociedad Espanola de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiologia Clinica. All rights reserved.

Introduction: Interferon-gamma release assays are widely used for the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection in low-prevalence countries. However, there is no consensus on their application. The objective of this study was to develop guidelines for the use of interferon-gamma release assays in specific clinical scenarios in Spain. Methods: A panel of experts comprising specialists in infectious diseases, respiratory diseases, microbiology, pediatrics and preventive medicine, together with a methodologist, formulated the clinical questions and outcomes of interest. They conducted a systematic literature search, summarized the evidence and rated its quality, and prepared the recommendations following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations of Assessment Development and Evaluations) methodology. Results: The panel prepared recommendations on the use of interferon-gamma release assays for the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection in the contact-tracing study (both adults and children), health care workers, immunosuppressed patients (patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus, patients with chronic immunomediated inflammatory diseases due to start biological therapy and patients requiring organ transplant) and for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis. Most recommendations were weak, mainly due to the lack of good quality evidence to balance the clinical benefits and disadvantages of the interferon-gamma release assays as compared with the tuberculin skin test. Conclusion: This document provides evidence-based guidance on the use of interferon-gamma release assays for the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection in patients at risk of tuberculosis or with suspicion of active disease. The guidelines will be applicable in specialist and primary care and in public health settings. © 2016 Elsevier España, S.L.U. y Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica. All rights reserved.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) provide recommendations on the benefits and harms of different healthcare interventions. Proper CPG development and implementation can potentially reduce variability in clinical practice while improving its quality and safety. The GRADE system is used to assess the quality of evidence and to grade the strength of recommendations in the context of the development of CPGs, systematic reviews or health technology assessments. The aim of this article is to describe the main characteristics of the GRADE system through relevant examples in the context of primary care. (C) 2013 Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Background: Patients with non-acute spinal cord injury that carry indwelling urinary catheters have an increased risk of urinary tract infection (UTIs). Antiseptic Silver Alloy-Coated Silicone Urinary Catheters seems to be a promising intervention to reduce UTIs; however, actual evidence cannot be extrapolated to spinal cord injured patients. The aim of this trial is to make a comparison between the use of antiseptic silver alloy-coated silicone urinary catheters and the use of standard urinary catheters in spinal cord injured patients to prevent UTIs. Methods/Design: The study will consist in an open, randomized, multicentre, and parallel clinical trial with blinded assessment. The study will include 742 spinal cord injured patients who require at least seven days of urethral catheterization as a method of bladder voiding. Participants will be online centrally randomized and allocated to one of the two study arms (silver alloy-coated or standard catheters). Catheters will be used for a maximum period of 30 days or removed earlier if the clinician considers it necessary. The main outcome will be the incidence of UTIs by the time of catheter removal or at day 30 after catheterization, the event that occurs first. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, as well as a primary analysis of all patients. Discussion: The aim of this study is to assess whether silver alloy-coated silicone urinary catheters improve ITUs in spinal cord injured patients. ESCALE is intended to be the first study to evaluate the efficacy of the silver alloy-coated catheters in spinal cord injured patients.

Background: The objective of this research is to generate quality of care indicators from systematic reviews to assess the appropriateness of obstetric care in hospitals. Methods: A search for systematic reviews about hospital obstetric interventions, conducted in The Cochrane Library, clinical evidence and practice guidelines, identified 303 reviews. We selected 48 high-quality evidence reviews, which resulted in strong clinical recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The 255 remaining reviews were excluded, mainly due to a lack of strong evidence provided by the studies reviewed. Results: A total of 18 indicators were formulated from these clinical recommendations, on antepartum care (8), care during delivery and postpartum (9), and incomplete miscarriage (1). Authors of the systematic reviews and specialists in obstetrics were consulted to refine the formulation of indicators. Conclusions: High-quality systematic reviews, whose conclusions clearly claim in favour or against an intervention, can be a source for generating quality indicators of delivery care. To make indicators coherent, the nuances of clinical practice should be considered. Any attempt made to evaluate the extent to which delivery care in hospitals is based on scientific evidence should take the generated indicators into account.

Background: Little is known about how frequently Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) need to be updated. Objectives: To provide empirical estimates of the average time for CPGs to become obsolete. Methods: We have randomly selected a sample of recommendations from four CPGs (Management of Major[for full text, please go to the a.m. URL], G-I-N Conference 2012

Background: DECIDE (Developing and Evaluating Communication Strategies to Support Informed Decisions and Practice Based on Evidence) is an international project funded by the European Union with the aim of improving dissemination of evidence-based recommendations based on the GRADE approach. One research[for full text, please go to the a.m. URL], G-I-N Conference 2012

Purpose: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on whole body vibration programs in older population and a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. Method: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsychINFO databases. We included randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of whole body vibration training in older populations compared to conventional exercise or control groups that assessed balance, muscle strength, falls, bone mineral density and adverse events. Results: Sixteen trials met the inclusion criteria. Comparing the vibration and the control group, we found that vibration significantly improved knee muscle isometric strength (18.30 Nm, 95% CI 7.9528.65), muscle power (10.44 W, 95% CI 2.8518.03) and balance control (Tinetti test: 4.5 points, 95% CI 0.958.11). Comparison with a conventional exercise showed that the only significant difference was bone mineral density in the femoral neck (0.04g/cm2, 95% CI 0.020.07). There were no serious complications in most of studies. Conclusion: Whole body vibration training may improve strength, power and balance in comparison with a control group, although these effects are not apparent when compared with a group that does conventional exercise. Implications for Rehabilitation Physical exercise is effective for improving balancing and walking, muscle strength in the legs, and cardiovascular resistance, and decreasing the risk of falling in older persons. Whole body vibration training can decrease the risk of falling related to muscle weakness or balance disorders in older people when compared with a control group, although these effects are not apparent when compared with a conventional exercise. Evidence is not conclusive to assess the effect of whole body vibration training on the incidence of falls. Safety concerns related to whole body vibration have not been identified. © 2012 Informa UK, Ltd.

Background: Despite the widespread use of interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs), their role in diagnosing tuberculosis and targeting preventive therapy in HIV-infected patients remains unclear. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review to contribute to the evidence-based practice in HIV-infected people. Methodology/Principal Findings: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Biomedicine databases to identify articles published between January 2005 and July 2011 that assessed QuantiFERON (R)-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) and T-SPOT (R). TB (T-SPOT.TB) in HIV-infected adults. We assessed their accuracy for the diagnosis of tuberculosis and incident active tuberculosis, and the proportion of indeterminate results. The search identified 38 evaluable studies covering a total of 6514 HIV-infected participants. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for tuberculosis were 61% and 72% for QFT-GIT, and 65% and 70% for T-SPOT.TB. The cumulative incidence of subsequent active tuberculosis was 8.3% for QFT-GIT and 10% for T-SPOT.TB in patients tested positive (one study each), and 0% for QFT-GIT (two studies) and T-SPOT.TB (one study) respectively in those tested negative. Pooled indeterminate rates were 8.2% for QFT-GIT and 5.9% for T-SPOT.TB. Rates were higher in high burden settings (12.0% for QFT-GIT and 7.7% for T-SPOT.TB) than in low-intermediate burden settings (3.9% for QFT-GIT and 4.3% for T-SPOT.TB). They were also higher in patients with CD4(+) T-cell count = 200 (3.1% for QFT-GIT and 7.9% for T-SPOT.TB). Conclusions/Significance: IGRAs have suboptimal accuracy for confirming or ruling out active tuberculosis disease in HIV-infected adults. While their predictive value for incident active tuberculosis is modest, a negative QFT-GIT implies a very low short-to medium-term risk. Identifying the factors associated with indeterminate results will help to optimize the use of IGRAs in clinical practice, particularly in resource-limited countries with a high prevalence of HIV-coinfection.

Levofloxacin is a new, recently commercialized fluoroquinolone. We aimed to assess the use of levofloxacin after its inclusion in the hospital drug guide. In a prospective observational study, patients treated with levofloxacin in a university hospital were selected from July 2000 to June 2001. Using a structured questionnaire, data were recorded on patients' demographic characteristics and comorbidities, indications for levofloxacin use and previous use of other antibiotics. In addition, the adherence to the instructions for use as recommended by the antibiotic subcommittee of the hospital, and the use of other alternative antibiotics were analyzed. Ninety-seven patients were treated [mean age 67 years; range 17-93; 64 men], of whom 83 (85.6%) had comorbidity and 51 (52.6%) a possible allergy to the betalactam antibiotics. The treatment began after the use of other antibiotics in 47 (48.5%) patients. The main clinical indications were pneumonia (54; 55.7%) and acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (25; 25.8%). The use of other antibiotics was possible in 56 (57.7%) patients, and levofloxacin was only used according to the recommended indications in 41 (42.3%). Levofloxacin is mainly used in the treatment of patients with respiratory infections, those who are allergic to the betalactam antibiotics and those previously treated with other antibiotics; however, in many cases, the use of other antibiotics may still be possible. As part of the antibiotic policy, it is necessary to define the indications of use for new antibiotics introduced in the hospital and surveillance studies need to be developed.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; Evidence-based medicine; Meta-analysis Trastorn per dèficit d'atenció amb hiperactivitat; Medicina basada en l'evidència; Metaanàlisi Trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad; Medicina basada en la evidencia; Metanálisis Purpose: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become fundamental tools for evidence-based medicine (EBM). However, CPG suffer from several limitations, including obsolescence, lack of applicability to many patients, and limited patient participation. This paper presents APPRAISE-RS, which is a methodology that we developed to overcome these limitations by automating, extending, and iterating the methodology that is most commonly used for building CPGs: the GRADE methodology.Method: APPRAISE-RS relies on updated information from clinical studies and adapts and automates the GRADE methodology to generate treatment recommendations. APPRAISE-RS provides personalized recommendations because they are based on the patient's individual characteristics. Moreover, both patients and clinicians express their personal preferences for treatment outcomes which are considered when making the recommendation (participatory). Rule-based system approaches are used to manage heuristic knowledge.Results: APPRAISE-RS has been implemented for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and tested experimentally on 28 simulated patients. The resulting recommender system (APPRAISE-RS/TDApp) shows a higher degree of treatment personalization and patient participation than CPGs, while recommending the most frequent interventions in the largest body of evidence in the literature (EBM). Moreover, a comparison of the results with four blinded psychiatrist prescriptions supports the validation of the proposal.Conclusions: APPRAISE-RS is a valid methodology to build recommender systems that manage updated, personalized and participatory recommendations, which, in the case of ADHD includes at least one intervention that is identical or very similar to other drugs prescribed by psychiatrists. This work was supported by European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the Spanish Ministry of the Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (MINECO) and the Carlos III Research Institute [PI19/00375], Fundació Pascual i Prats & Campus Salut, UdG [AIN2018E], Generalitat de Catalunya [2017 SGR 1551].