When is a guideline not a guideline? The devil is in the details

Analysis and comparison of clinical practice guidelines regarding treatment recommendations for chronic tinnitus in adults: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine if, and to what extent, published clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of chronic tinnitus vary in their recommendations.

DESIGN

Systematic review of guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE and GIN electronic databases were searched in March 2022 and the search was updated in June 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included clinical practice guidelines that gave recommendations on the treatment of tinnitus. No language restrictions were applied.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted the data and used the AGREE checklist to report on reporting.

RESULTS

A total of 10 guidelines were identified and included, published between 2011 and 2021. Recommendations for 13 types of tinnitus treatments were compared. Large differences in guideline development and methodology were found. Seven of the 10 guidelines included a systematic search of the literature to identify the available evidence. Six of the 10 guidelines used a framework for the development of the guideline. Reporting was poor in multiple guidelines. Counselling and cognitive behavioural therapy were the only treatments that were recommended for treating tinnitus associated distress by all guidelines that reported on these topics. Tinnitus retraining therapy, sound therapy, hearing aids and cochlear implantation were not unanimously recommended either due to the lack of evidence, a high risk of bias or judgement of no beneficial effect of the specific treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

There were notable differences with respect to whether guidelines considered the available evidence sufficient enough to make a recommendation. Notably, we identified substantial differences in the rigour of guideline design and development. Reporting was poor in many guidelines. Future guidelines could benefit from the use of reporting tools to improve reporting and transparency and the inclusion of guideline experts and patients to improve the quality of clinical practice guidelines on tinnitus.

Quality evaluation of clinical practice guidelines for thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic trauma based on AGREE II and AGREE-REX: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Orthopaedic trauma patients are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). As VTE prophylaxis has gradually raised public concerns, guidelines related to this topic have increased over time. However, the existing recommendations of thromboprophylaxis guidelines in orthopaedic trauma patients are still inconsistent, and the quality of the guidelines and recommendations for the topic still lacks comprehensive assessments. This review aims to critically appraise clinical practice guidelines for thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic trauma patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a comprehensive literature search up to 31 October 2022 in databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, etc), academic websites and guideline repositories. The quality of the guidelines and recommendations will be assessed by five reviewers independently using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II instrument (AGREE-II) and the AGREE - Recommendation EXcellence (AGREE-REX). We will summarise the characteristics of the guidelines and compare the differences between these recommendations.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will follow the Declaration of Helsinki and has received approval from the Ethics Committee on Biomedical Research, West China Hospital, Sichuan University (ethics approval no. 2021-989). The results will be summarised as a paper, disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, and will help guide further research in the future.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021273405.

Harm Reduction, Humanistic Psychology, and the CRPD

Harm reduction, which was initially developed as a public health response to illicit drug use, has relevance to the prescription of psychotropic medication. Indeed, focusing on the agency of people who use drugs—licit or illicit—facilitates a more authentic engagement with treatment. In this paper, we show how the framework of harm reduction is congruent with the guiding principles of both humanistic psychology and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Moreover, applying a harm reduction model to psychotropic drug use raises awareness that there are risks to taking these medications, risks which are frequently glossed over because of the emphasis on medication adherence and compliance. We provide case examples of organizations that take a person-centered (vs. medication-centered) approach to people experiencing mental health crises. In their unique ways, these organizations embody the principles of harm reduction and the humanistic impulse that informs the CRPD.

Project rebuild the evidence base (REB): A method to interpret randomised clinical trials and their meta-analysis to present solid benefit-risk assessments to patients

Evidence-based medicine is the cornerstone of shared-decision making in healthcare today. The public deserves clear, transparent and trust-worthy information on drug efficacy. Yet today, many drugs are prescribed and used without solid evidence of efficacy. Clinical trials and randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are the best method to evaluate drug efficacy and side effects. In a shared medical decision-making approach, general practitioners need drug assessment based on patient-important outcomes. The aim of project rebuild the evidence base (REB) is to bridge the gap between the data needed in clinical practice and the data available from clinical research. The drugs will be assessed on clinical patient important outcomes and for a population. Using the Cochrane tools, we propose to analyse for each population and outcome: 1) a meta-analysis based on RCTs with a low risk of bias overall; 2) an evaluation of results of confirmatory RCTs; 3) a statistical analysis of heterrogeneity between RCTs and 4) an analysis of publication bias. Depending on the results of these analyses, the evidence will be categorized in 4 different levels: firm evidence, evidence (to be confirmed), signal or absence of evidence. Project REB proposes a method for reading and interpreting RCTs and their meta-analysis to produce quality data for general practitioners to focus on risk-benefit assessment in the interest of patients. If this data does not exist, it could enable clinical research to better its aim.

Dynamic Digital Twin: Diagnosis, Treatment, Prediction, and Prevention of Disease During the Life Course

A digital twin (DT), originally defined as a virtual representation of a physical asset, system, or process, is a new concept in health care. A DT in health care is not a single technology but a domain-adapted multimodal modeling approach incorporating the acquisition, management, analysis, prediction, and interpretation of data, aiming to improve medical decision-making. However, there are many challenges and barriers that must be overcome before a DT can be used in health care. In this viewpoint paper, we build on the current literature, address these challenges, and describe a dynamic DT in health care for optimizing individual patient health care journeys, specifically for women at risk for cardiovascular complications in the preconception and pregnancy periods and across the life course. We describe how we can commit multiple domains to developing this DT. With our cross-domain definition of the DT, we aim to define future goals, trade-offs, and methods that will guide the development of the dynamic DT and implementation strategies in health care.

Ten years later: a review of the US 2009 institute of medicine report on conflicts of interest and solutions for further reform

Conflicts of interest (COIs) in healthcare are increasingly discussed in the literature, yet these relationships continue to influence healthcare. Research has consistently shown that financial COIs shape prescribing practices, medical education and guideline recommendations. In 2009, the Institute of Medicine (IOM, now the National Academy of Medicine) published Conflicts of Interest in Medical Research, Practice, and Education-one of the most comprehensive reviews of empirical research on COIs in medicine. Ten years after publication of theIOM's report, we review the current state of COIs within medicine. We also provide specific recommendations for enhancing scientific integrity in medical research, practice, education and editorial practices.

Pediatric traumatic brain injury prehospital guidelines: a systematic review and appraisal

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) disproportionately affects children within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Prehospital emergency care can mitigate secondary brain injury and improve outcomes. Here, we systematically review clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for pediatric TBI with the goal to inform LMICs prehospital care.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. We appraised evidence-based CPGs addressing prehospital management of pediatric TBI using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) tool. CPGs were rated as high-quality if ≥ 5 (out of 6) AGREE domains scored > 60%.

RESULTS

Of the 326 articles identified, 10 CPGs were included in analysis. All 10 were developed in HICs, and 4 were rated as high-quality. A total of 154 pediatric prehospital recommendations were grouped into three subcategories, initial assessment (35.7%), prehospital treatment (38.3%), and triage (26.0%). Of these, 79 (51.3%) were evidence-based with grading, and 31 (20.1%) were consensus-based without direct evidence.

CONCLUSION

Currently available CPGs for prehospital pediatric TBI management were all developed in HICs. Four CPGs have high-quality, and recommendations from these can serve as frameworks for LMICs or resource-limited settings. Context-specific evaluation and implementation of evidence-based recommendations allow LMIC settings to respond to the public health crisis of pediatric TBI and address gaps in trauma care systems.

Patient engagement in the design of clinical research in Noonan syndrome spectrum disorders: a scoping review

Background

Noonan syndrome spectrum disorders are a group of disorders caused by mutations in several genes of the RAS/MAPK pathway. Because of a highly heterogeneity and variable phenotypical manifestations of the disorders, these children and adults have a variable number of symptoms. Inclusion of their perceived experience of their health and developmental problems in research (design) could contribute to increased relevance of the research process and outcomes. The aim of this study is to get insight in what way patients with a Noonan syndrome spectrum disorder have been involved in the research process in order to learn for future engagement practices.

Methods and results

To that end, the degree of engagement was measured by the eight levels of the participation ladder of Arnstein. Using a scoping review approach, 18 articles were selected in which patient engagement in the design of studies in patients with Noonan syndrome spectrum disorders was described over the past twenty years. Six of these articles reported engagement on the level of informing (level 3), 8 on the level of consultation (level 4), 2 on the level of placation (level 5)and 2 on the level of partnership (level 6).

Conclusions

The current results do show a positive albeit still modest development of patient engagement over the last few years. A promising way to stimulate engagement is aiming to yield insights in the most important patients’ needs by developing a patient guided research agenda. However, this is not automatically followed by patient engagement at higher levels of participation in subsequent research steps. For this reason, in the Netherlands for example, a Dutch Noonan syndrome spectrum disorders research agenda is being developed, in a collaboration between the Dutch Noonan Syndrome Foundation and national scientific and clinical professionals.

UNDERSTANDING DOCTOR DECISION MAKING: THE CASE OF DEPRESSION TREATMENT

Treatment for depression is complex, requiring decisions that may involve trade-offs between exploiting treatments with the highest expected value and experimenting with treatments with higher possible payoffs. Using patient claims data, we show that among skilled doctors, using a broader portfolio of drugs predicts better patient outcomes, except in cases where doctors' decisions violate loose professional guidelines. We introduce a behavioral model of decision making guided by our empirical observations. The model's novel feature is that the trade-off between exploitation and experimentation depends on the doctor's diagnostic skill. The model predicts that higher diagnostic skill leads to greater diversity in drug choice and better matching of drugs to patients even among doctors with the same initial beliefs regarding drug effectiveness. Consistent with the finding that guideline violations predict poorer patient outcomes, simulations of the model suggest that increasing the number of possible drug choices can lower performance.

Automated Verification of Care Pathways Using Constraint Programming

Bad construction of modeled care pathways can lead to satisfiability problems during the pathway execution. These problems can ultimately result in medical errors and need to be checked as formally as possible. Therefore, this study proposes a set of algorithms using a free open-source library dedicated to constraint programming allied with a DSL to encode and verify care pathways, checking four possible problems: states in deadlock, non-determinism, inaccessible steps and transitions with logically equivalent guard conditions. We then test our algorithms in 84 real care pathways used both in hospitals and surgeries. Using our algorithms, we were able to find 200 problems taking less than 1 second to complete the verification on most pathways.

Digital aripiprazole or digital evergreening? A systematic review of the evidence and its dissemination in the scientific literature and in the media

BACKGROUND

In November 2017, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a version of a second-generation antipsychotic, aripiprazole, embedded with a sensor (Abilify MyCite).

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the evidence supporting the FDA's approval of digital aripiprazole and how that evidence was disseminated in the scientific literature and news reports.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised and non-comparative studies were included if they focused on the use of digital aripiprazole. All scientific publications citing the trials were included if written in English. For the news reports, all languages were included if an English translation was available, and all records that were published after FDA approval were included.

FINDINGS

In the primary evidence search, no RCT comparing digital aripiprazole with a non-digital formulation, other active comparators or placebo was found. Only three non-comparative uncontrolled cohorts were found. No study provided data on remission, quality of life or any efficacy outcome. Fourteen scientific papers were identified that cited the trials and 70 news stories met the inclusion criteria. Almost 80% (11/14) of the scientific papers and three-fourths (52/70) of the news stories conveyed an unsupported impression of benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Regulatory approval for this first-ever digital drug was based on weak evidence, and there was no evidence of better adherence with the digital version of aripiprazole compared with the non-digital version. The possibilities afforded by this technology make room for a new type of evergreening (ie, patenting of older drugs with a sensor as a 'new invention'). Both the scientific literature and news reports conveyed an unsupported impression of benefit.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018089515.

Evidence-based practice: a comparison of International Clinical Practice Guidelines and current research on physical activity for mild to moderate depression

In 2016, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended routine depression screening for individuals aged 13 and above. Questionnaire-based screening will likely increase treatment in patients with milder symptoms. Although professional groups who develop clinical practice guidelines recognize the importance of considering the risks and benefits of interventions, no official mandate exists for a stepped-care approach. Physical activity warrants increased consideration in guidelines, given the optimal risk/benefit profile and the increasing evidence of efficacy for the treatment and prevention of depression. The aim of the current study was to evaluate clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of major depressive disorder, specifically the recommendation of physical activity and adherence to a stepped-care approach. Authors searched three databases to identify treatment guidelines for depression. Guidelines were reviewed on the following domains regarding recommendation of physical activity: (a) front-line intervention, (b) explicit but not front-line recommendation, (c) inexplicit recommendation, (d) no mention, (e) adherence to a stepped-care approach, and (f) presentation of empirical support for their recommendation. Seventeen guidelines met inclusion criteria. Four guidelines recommended physical activity as a front-line intervention, two did not mention physical activity, eleven made some mention of physical activity, seven presented evidence to support their recommendation, and seven employed a stepped-care approach. The majority of guidelines did not use a stepped-care approach and varied greatly in their inclusion of physical activity as a recommended intervention for mild to moderate depression. Implications for practice, research, and policy are discussed.

Factors Associated With High-Quality Guidelines for the Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Diseases in Primary Care: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

As the rate of publication of new and sometimes conflicting medical research increases, clinicians rely heavily on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to inform practice. However, CPGs are of widely variable quality, and there are no existing objective measures to rate the quality of CPGs.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically assess 421 CPGs for the management of common noncommunicable diseases in primary care using the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument, version II (AGREE-II) tool and elucidate the factors associated with quality of CPGs.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and 12 websites for CPGs were searched for CPGs for the management of common noncommunicable diseases in primary care published between January 1, 2011, and August 30, 2017. The assessment of the quality of CPGs was performed by 3 appraisers using the 6 domains of the AGREE-II instrument. A multiple logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with quality of CPGs.

FINDINGS

Of the 421 CPGs reviewed, 23.5% (99) were classified as high quality. Among included guidelines, clarity of presentation (70%) and scope and purpose (61%) had the highest median AGREE-II scores. The domains with the lowest median scores were applicability (22%) and rigor of development (33%). Factors associated with high-quality CPGs included having more than 20 authors (odds ratio, 9.08; 95% CI, 3.35-24.62), development at governmental institutions (odds ratio, 10.38; 95% CI, 2.72-39.60), and reporting funding (odds ratio, 10.34; 95% CI, 4.77-22.39). Year of publication, region, guideline version, and scope were not associated with quality among included CPGs.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Primary care professionals and policymakers should be aware that CPGs in primary care are of widely variable quality, with less than 25% of included CPGs rated as high quality. High-quality CPGs were associated with a higher number of authors, governmental institutions, and the report of funding. Region of origin was not associated with quality of CPGs, which suggests that the improvement of the quality of CPGs should be an international concern.