OBJECTIVE: To synthesize recommendations on assessing and managing behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSDs) in existing clinical practice guidelines on dementia care to learn from and adapt recommendations to a Canadian context and language for describing BPSDs.
METHODS: Systematic review.
METHODS: Moderate to high-quality clinical practice guidelines on dementia care that made 1 or more recommendations on BPSD assessment or management.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, JBI EBM, PsycINFO, AgeLine, and gray literature for clinical practice guidelines on dementia care making recommendations on BPSD, published between January 1, 2011, and October 13, 2022. Two independent reviewers conducted study screening and data abstraction. Four independent reviewers completed quality appraisal using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool; included guidelines had a mean overall AGREE II score ≥4.
RESULTS: Our systematic review identified 23 moderate to high-quality clinical practice guidelines (264 recommendations). The mean overall quality score on the AGREE II tool ranged from 4 to 6.5. Recommendations were clearly presented (mean clarity of presentation score 73.5%), but guideline applicability was not consistently addressed (mean applicability score 39.3%). BPSD was the most prevalent term describing neuropsychiatric symptoms (number of guidelines [n] = 14). People with lived experience contributed to 6 guidelines (26.1%). Ten guidelines (43.5%) described 1 or more health equity considerations. Guidelines made recommendations for assessing and managing agitation (n = 12), aggression (n = 10), psychosis (n = 11), depression (n = 9), anxiety (n = 5), apathy (n = 6), inappropriate sexual behavior (n = 3), nighttime behavior (n = 5), and eating disturbances (n = 3). There was substantial variability in recommendation statements, evidence quality assigned to each statement, and strength of recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS: There are several moderate to high-quality clinical practice guidelines making recommendations on BPSD assessment and management, but variability in recommendation statements across guidelines and insufficient consideration of guideline applicability may hamper guideline dissemination and implementation in clinical practice.

Exome sequencing (ES) enhanced the diagnostic yield of genetic testing, but has also increased the possibility of uncertain findings. Prenatal ES is increasingly being offered after a fetal abnormality is detected through ultrasound. It is important to know how to handle uncertainty in this particularly stressful period. This systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of guidelines available for addressing uncertainty related to prenatal chromosomal microarray (CMA) and ES. Ten uncertainty types associated with prenatal ES and CMA were identified and defined by an international multidisciplinary team. Medline (all) and Embase were systematically searched. Laboratory scientists, clinical geneticists, psychologists, and a fetal medicine specialist screened the papers and performed the data extraction. Nineteen papers were included. Recommendations generally emphasized the importance of trio analysis, clinical information, data sharing, validation and re-analysis, protocols, multidisciplinary teams, genetic counselling, whether to limit the possible scope of results, and when to report particular findings. This systematic review helps provide a vocabulary for uncertainties, and a compass to navigate uncertainties. Prenatal CMA and ES guidelines provide a strong starting point for determining how to handle uncertainty. Gaps in guidelines and recommendations were identified and discussed to provide direction for future research and policy making.

OBJECTIVE: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are a key step in fighting the pandemic. Nevertheless, their rapid development did not allow for testing among specific population subgroups such as pregnant and breastfeeding women, or elaborating specific guidelines for healthcare personnel working in high infection risk specialties, such as otolaryngology (ORL). This clinical consensus statement (CCS) aims to offer guidance for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to this high-risk population based on the best evidence available.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary international panel of 33 specialists judged statements through a two-round modified Delphi method survey. Statements were designed to encompass the following topics: risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection and use of protective equipment in ORL; SARS-Cov-2 infection and vaccines and respective risks for the mother/child dyad; and counseling for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnant, breastfeeding, or fertile healthcare workers (PBFHW). All ORL PBFHW were considered as the target audience.
RESULTS: Of the 13 statements, 7 reached consensus or strong consensus, 2 reached no consensus, and 2 reached near-consensus. According to the statements with strong consensus otorhinolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or with childbearing potential should have the opportunity to receive SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. Moreover, personal protective equipment (PPE) should still be used even after the vaccination.
CONCLUSIONS: Until prospective evaluations on these topics are available, ORL-HNS must be considered a high infection risk specialty. While the use of PPE remains pivotal, ORL PBFHW should be allowed access to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination provided they receive up-to-date information.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: The definition of severe uncontrolled asthma and the best phenotype-driven management are not fully established. Objective: We aimed to reach a consensus on the definition of severe uncontrolled asthma and give recommendations on optimal management with phenotype-targeted biological therapies.
METHODS: A modified Delphi technique was used. A scientific committee provided statements addressing the definition of severe uncontrolled asthma and controversial issues about its treatment with biologics. The questionnaire was evaluated in 2 rounds by expert allergists. With the results, the scientific committee developed recommendations and a practical algorithm.
RESULTS: A panel of 27 allergists reached agreement on 27 out of the 29 items provided (93.1%). A consensus definition of severe uncontrolled asthma was agreed. Prior to initiation of therapy, it is mandatory to establish the asthma phenotype and assess the presence of clinically important allergic sensitizations. Anti-IgE, anti-IL-5, anti-IL-5 receptor, and anti-IL-13/IL-4 receptor inhibitors are suitable options for patients with allergic asthma and a blood eosinophil level >300/μL (>150/μL in patients receiving oral corticosteroids). IL-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor inhibitors are recommended for patients with an eosinophilic phenotype and can also be used for patients with severe eosinophilic allergic asthma with no or a suboptimal response to omalizumab. Dupilumab is recommended for patients with moderate-severe asthma and a TH2-high phenotype. Only physicians with experience in the treatment of severe uncontrolled asthma should initiate biological treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: We provide consensus clinical recommendations that may be useful in the management of patients with severe uncontrolled asthma.

BACKGROUND: The Japanese Psycho-Oncology Society and Japanese Association of Supportive Care in Cancer recently launched the clinical practice guidelines for delirium in adult cancer patients. The aim of the guidelines was to provide evidence-based recommendations for the clinical assessment and management of delirium in cancer patients. This article reports the process of developing the guideline and summarizes the recommendations made.
METHODS: The guidelines were developed in accordance with the Medical Information Network Distribution Service creation procedures. The guideline development group, consisting of multidisciplinary members, formulated nine clinical questions. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant articles published prior to through 31 May 2016. Each article was reviewed by two independent reviewers. The level of evidence and the strength of the recommendations were graded using the grading system developed by the Medical Information Network Distribution Service, following the concept of The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. The modified Delphi method was used to validate the recommendation statements.
RESULTS: This article provides a summary of the recommendations with rationales for each, as well as a short summary.
CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines will support the clinical assessment and management of delirium in cancer patients. However, additional clinical studies are warranted to further improve the management of delirium.

The Guideline Workshop 2019, held in October 2019 in Munich, Germany, had the purpose of facilitating discussion on strategies for optimization of guideline processes in diabetes amongst a group of representatives of renown national and international societies in the field of diabetes, cardiology, and nephrology. Results of this panel\'s discussions are presented in this manuscript and comprise a variety of suggestions for improving the quality and usability of guidelines, as well as to accelerate the development and responsiveness of guidelines to newly published, relevant data from clinical trials such as cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes mellitus. These include, but are not limited to, recommendations to optimize presentation of content in guidelines, use of the GRADE-approach to rating the quality of evidence to harmonize guidelines, and utilization of digital health technologies to accelerate, streamline, and optimize communication on relevant data and development of clinical guidelines and necessary updates, while reducing costs. Recognizing that achieving alignment in guideline development among various medical organizations will be a long-term process, representatives from cross-sectional medical organizations relevant to cardio-renal metabolic disease and experts in guideline methodology will work together in the future. Among other activities, it is planned to continue the activity and organize a Guideline Workshop in 2020.

In 2017, Cancer Care Ontario\'s Program in Evidence-Based Care released the Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline. This guideline included recommendations across a relatively broad clinical spectrum within prostate cancer. Topics addressed ranged from management of osteoporotic fracture risk in nonmetastatic disease to management of men with castration-resistant prostate cancer metastatic to bone. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations.
The Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Expert Panel then reviewed the content and the recommendations.
The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline were clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO wholly endorses the Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline.
The ASCO Expert Panel endorses all the original guideline recommendations as written and offers a series of discussion points to guide practice for clinicians as they manage bone-related risks within this patient population.

Treatment for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) that is not concordant with the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer has been associated with higher healthcare utilization and payer costs. However, a significant knowledge gap exists regarding the impact of guideline-discordant care on patient cost responsibility. This study examined this question among patients with MBC in the year postdiagnosis.
This retrospective cohort study used data from the SEER-Medicare linked database from 2000 through 2013. Guideline discordance, defined by year-specific NCCN Guidelines, was assessed for first-line antineoplastic treatment and grouped into discrete categories. Patient cost responsibility (deductibles, coinsurance, copayments) in women with MBC were summed for all medical care received in the year postdiagnosis. The difference in patient cost responsibility by guideline discordance status was estimated using linear mixed-effect models.
Of 3,709 patients with MBC surviving at least 1 year postdiagnosis, 17.6% (n=651) received guideline-discordant treatment. Median cost responsibility in the year postdiagnosis for patients receiving guideline-discordant treatment was $7,421 (interquartile range [IQR], $4,359-$12,983) versus $5,171 (IQR, $3,006-$8,483) for those receiving guideline-concordant care. In adjusted models, guideline-discordant treatment was significantly associated with $1,841 higher patient costs in the first year from index diagnosis date (95% CI, $1,280-$2,401) compared with guideline-concordant care. Patient cost responsibility differed by category of guideline discordance, with those receiving nonapproved bevacizumab having the highest cost responsibility (β=$3,330; 95% CI, $1,711-$4,948).
Deviations from current treatment guidelines may have implications on patient healthcare cost responsibility. Additional research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms underlying how guideline deviation leads to greater costs for patients with MBC.