The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016)

Background and purposeThe Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in February 2017 and published in the Journal of JSICM, [2017; Volume 24 (supplement 2)] https://doi.org/10.3918/jsicm.24S0001 and Journal of Japanese Association for Acute Medicine [2017; Volume 28, (supplement 1)] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jja2.2017.28.issue-S1/issuetoc.This abridged English edition of the J-SSCG 2016 was produced with permission from the Japanese Association of Acute Medicine and the Japanese Society for Intensive Care Medicine.MethodsMembers of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine were selected and organized into 19 committee members and 52 working group members. The guidelines were prepared in accordance with the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) creation procedures. The Academic Guidelines Promotion Team was organized to oversee and provide academic support to the respective activities allocated to each Guideline Creation Team. To improve quality assurance and workflow transparency, a mutual peer review system was established, and discussions within each team were open to the public. Public comments were collected once after the initial formulation of a clinical question (CQ) and twice during the review of the final draft. Recommendations were determined to have been adopted after obtaining support from a two-thirds (> 66.6%) majority vote of each of the 19 committee members.ResultsA total of 87 CQs were selected among 19 clinical areas, including pediatric topics and several other important areas not covered in the first edition of the Japanese guidelines (J-SSCG 2012). The approval rate obtained through committee voting, in addition to ratings of the strengths of the recommendation, and its supporting evidence were also added to each recommendation statement. We conducted meta-analyses for 29 CQs. Thirty-seven CQs contained recommendations in the form of an expert consensus due to insufficient evidence. No recommendations were provided for five CQs.ConclusionsBased on the evidence gathered, we were able to formulate Japanese-specific clinical practice guidelines that are tailored to the Japanese context in a highly transparent manner. These guidelines can easily be used not only by specialists, but also by non-specialists, general clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, clinical engineers, and other healthcare professionals

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members.As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.other authors: Satoru Hashimoto,Daisuke Hasegawa,Junji Hatakeyama,Naoki Hara,Naoki Higashibeppu,Nana Furushima,Hirotaka Furusono,Yujiro Matsuishi,Tasuku Matsuyama,Yusuke Minematsu,Ryoichi Miyashita,Yuji Miyatake,Megumi Moriyasu,Toru Yamada,Hiroyuki Yamada,Ryo Yamamoto,Takeshi Yoshida,Yuhei Yoshida,Jumpei Yoshimura,Ryuichi Yotsumoto,Hiroshi Yonekura,Takeshi Wada,Eizo Watanabe,Makoto Aoki,Hideki Asai,Takakuni Abe,Yutaka Igarashi,Naoya Iguchi,Masami Ishikawa,Go Ishimaru,Shutaro Isokawa,Ryuta Itakura,Hisashi Imahase,Haruki Imura,Takashi Irinoda,Kenji Uehara,Noritaka Ushio,Takeshi Umegaki,Yuko Egawa,Yuki Enomoto,Kohei Ota,Yoshifumi Ohchi,Takanori Ohno,Hiroyuki Ohbe,Kazuyuki Oka,Nobunaga Okada,Yohei Okada,Hiromu Okano,Jun Okamoto,Hiroshi Okuda,Takayuki Ogura,Yu Onodera,Yuhta Oyama,Motoshi Kainuma,Eisuke Kako,Masahiro Kashiura,Hiromi Kato,Akihiro Kanaya,Tadashi Kaneko,Keita Kanehata,Ken-ichi Kano,Hiroyuki Kawano,Kazuya Kikutani,Hitoshi Kikuchi,Takahiro Kido,Sho Kimura,Hiroyuki Koami,Daisuke Kobashi,Iwao Saiki,Masahito Sakai,Ayaka Sakamoto,Tetsuya Sato,Yasuhiro Shiga,Manabu Shimoto,Shinya Shimoyama,Tomohisa Shoko,Yoh Sugawara,Atsunori Sugita,Satoshi Suzuki,Yuji Suzuki,Tomohiro Suhara,Kenji Sonota,Shuhei Takauji,Kohei Takashima,Sho Takahashi,Yoko Takahashi,Jun Takeshita,Yuuki Tanaka,Akihito Tampo,Taichiro Tsunoyama,Kenichi Tetsuhara,Kentaro Tokunaga,Yoshihiro Tomioka,Kentaro Tomita,Naoki Tominaga,Mitsunobu Toyosaki,Yukitoshi Toyoda,Hiromichi Naito,Isao Nagata,Tadashi Nagato,Yoshimi Nakamura,Yuki Nakamori,Isao Nahara,Hiromu Naraba,Chihiro Narita,Norihiro Nishioka,Tomoya Nishimura,Kei Nishiyama,Tomohisa Nomura,Taiki Haga,Yoshihiro Hagiwara,Katsuhiko Hashimoto,Takeshi Hatachi,Toshiaki Hamasaki,Takuya Hayashi,Minoru Hayashi,Atsuki Hayamizu,Go Haraguchi,Yohei Hirano,Ryo Fujii,Motoki Fujita,Naoyuki Fujimura,Hiraku Funakoshi,Masahito Horiguchi,Jun Maki,Naohisa Masunaga,Yosuke Matsumura,Takuya Mayumi,Keisuke Minami,Yuya Miyazaki,Kazuyuki Miyamoto,Teppei Murata,Machi Yanai,Takao Yano,Kohei Yamada,Naoki Yamada,Tomonori Yamamoto,Shodai Yoshihiro,Hiroshi Tanaka,Osamu NishidaGuideline

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members.other authors: Yasuhiro Norisue, Satoru Hashimoto, Daisuke Hasegawa, Junji Hatakeyama, Naoki Hara, Naoki Higashibeppu, Nana Furushima, Hirotaka Furusono, Yujiro Matsuishi, Tasuku Matsuyama, Yusuke Minematsu, Ryoichi Miyashita, Yuji Miyatake, Megumi Moriyasu, Toru Yamada, Hiroyuki Yamada, Ryo Yamamoto, Takeshi Yoshida, Yuhei Yoshida, Jumpei Yoshimura, Ryuichi Yotsumoto, Hiroshi Yonekura, Takeshi Wada, Eizo Watanabe, Makoto Aoki, Hideki Asai, Takakuni Abe, Yutaka Igarashi, Naoya Iguchi, Masami Ishikawa, Go Ishimaru, Shutaro Isokawa, Ryuta Itakura, Hisashi Imahase, Haruki Imura, Takashi Irinoda, Kenji Uehara, Noritaka Ushio, Takeshi Umegaki, Yuko Egawa, Yuki Enomoto, Kohei Ota, Yoshifumi Ohchi, Takanori Ohno, Hiroyuki Ohbe, Kazuyuki Oka, Nobunaga Okada, Yohei Okada, Hiromu Okano, Jun Okamoto, Hiroshi Okuda, Takayuki Ogura, Yu Onodera, Yuhta Oyama, Motoshi Kainuma, Eisuke Kako, Masahiro Kashiura, Hiromi Kato, Akihiro Kanaya, Tadashi Kaneko, Keita Kanehata, Ken-ichi Kano, Hiroyuki Kawano, Kazuya Kikutani, Hitoshi Kikuchi, Takahiro Kido, Sho Kimura, Hiroyuki Koami, Daisuke Kobashi, Iwao Saiki, Masahito Sakai, Ayaka Sakamoto, Tetsuya Sato, Yasuhiro Shiga, Manabu Shimoto, Shinya Shimoyama, Tomohisa Shoko, Yoh Sugawara, Atsunori Sugita, Satoshi Suzuki, Yuji Suzuki, Tomohiro Suhara, Kenji Sonota, Shuhei Takauji, Kohei Takashima, Sho Takahashi, Yoko Takahashi, Jun Takeshita, Yuuki Tanaka, Akihito Tampo, Taichiro Tsunoyama, Kenichi Tetsuhara, Kentaro Tokunaga, Yoshihiro Tomioka, Kentaro Tomita, Naoki Tominaga, Mitsunobu Toyosaki, Yukitoshi Toyoda, Hiromichi Naito, Isao Nagata, Tadashi Nagato, Yoshimi Nakamura, Yuki Nakamori, Isao Nahara, Hiromu Naraba, Chihiro Narita, Norihiro Nishioka, Tomoya Nishimura, Kei Nishiyama, Tomohisa Nomura, Taiki Haga, Yoshihiro Hagiwara, Katsuhiko Hashimoto, Takeshi Hatachi, Toshiaki Hamasaki, Takuya Hayashi, Minoru Hayashi, Atsuki Hayamizu, Go Haraguchi, Yohei Hirano, Ryo Fujii, Motoki Fujita, Naoyuki Fujimura, Hiraku Funakoshi, Masahito Horiguchi, Jun Maki, Naohisa Masunaga, Yosuke Matsumura, Takuya Mayumi, Keisuke Minami, Yuya Miyazaki, Kazuyuki Miyamoto, Teppei Murata, Machi Yanai, Takao Yano, Kohei Yamada, Naoki Yamada, Tomonori Yamamoto, Shodai Yoshihiro, Hiroshi Tanaka & Osamu Nishid

Comparison of Different Symptom Assessment Scales for Multiple System Atrophy

To identify the most sensitive scale for use in clinical trials on multiple system atrophy (MSA), a short and sensitive scale is needed for MSA clinical trials. Potential candidates are the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS), Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), MSA Health-Related Quality of Life scale (MSA-QoL), and Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson's Disease-Autonomic questionnaire (SCOPA-AUT). We enrolled patients with MSA from eight hospitals in Hokkaido, Japan. Board-certified neurologists assessed each patient at 6-month intervals and scored them on the UMSARS, SARA, BBS, MSA-QoL, and SCOPA-AUT. Score changes were evaluated using the standardized response mean (SRM). The correlation between disease duration and each score was examined. The first evaluation was conducted on 85 patients (60 patients with MSA cerebellar ataxia dominant subtype [MSA-C] and 25 patients with MSA Parkinsonism-dominant subtype [MSA-P]). Sixty-nine patients were examined after 6 months and 63 patients after 12 months. The UMSARS Part 4 had the largest SRM after 6 months and the SARA after 12 months. SRMs for MSA-P, the shorter duration group, and the early-onset group were larger than were those for MSA-C, the longer duration group, and the late-onset group. SRMs for items regarding skilled hand activities, walking, and standing were relatively large. Our study indicates that the UMSARS (parts 2 and 4), SARA, and BBS are sensitive scales for evaluating MSA progression over 12 months. Items with large SRMs effectively evaluated short-term changes

Multiple system atrophy in Hokkaido, Japan : a prospective registry study of natural history and symptom assessment scales followed for 5 years.

Objectives Multiple system atrophy (MSA) is a refractory neurodegenerative disease, but novel treatments are anticipated. An accurate natural history of MSA is important for clinical trials, but is insufficient. This regional registry was launched to complement clinical information on MSA. Setting Patient recruitment started in November 2014 and is ongoing at the time of submission. The number of participating facilities was 66. Postal surveys were sent to medical facilities and patients with MSA in Hokkaido, Japan. Participants After obtaining written consent from 196 participants, 184 overview surveys and 115 detailed surveys were conducted. Primary and secondary outcome measures An overview survey evaluated conformity to diagnostic criteria and a detailed survey implemented an annual assessment based on the Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale (UMSARS). Results At the time of registration, 58.2% of patients were diagnosed with cerebellar symptoms predominant type MSA (MSA-C) and 29.9% were diagnosed with parkinsonism predominant type MSA (MSA-P). UMSARS Part Ⅳ score of 4 or 5 accounted for 53.8% of participants. The higher the UMSARS Part Ⅳ score, the higher the proportion of MSA-P. At baseline, levodopa was used by 69 patients (37.5%) and the average levodopa dose was 406.7?mg/day. The frequency of levodopa use increased over time. Eleven cases changed from MSA-C to MSA-P during the study, but the opposite was not observed. Information about survival and causes of death was collected on 54 cases. Half of deaths were respiratory-related. Sudden death was recorded even in the group with UMSARS Part Ⅳ score of 1. Conclusions This study is the first large-scale prospective MSA cohort study in Asia. MSA-C was dominant, but the use of antiparkinsonian drugs increased over the study period. Changes from MSA-C to MSA-P occurred, but not vice versa

Multiple system atrophy in Hokkaido, Japan: a prospective registry study of natural history and symptom assessment scales followed for 5 years

Objectives Multiple system atrophy (MSA) is a refractory neurodegenerative disease, but novel treatments are anticipated. An accurate natural history of MSA is important for clinical trials, but is insufficient. This regional registry was launched to complement clinical information on MSA.Setting Patient recruitment started in November 2014 and is ongoing at the time of submission. The number of participating facilities was 66. Postal surveys were sent to medical facilities and patients with MSA in Hokkaido, Japan.Participants After obtaining written consent from 196 participants, 184 overview surveys and 115 detailed surveys were conducted.Primary and secondary outcome measures An overview survey evaluated conformity to diagnostic criteria and a detailed survey implemented an annual assessment based on the Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale (UMSARS).Results At the time of registration, 58.2% of patients were diagnosed with cerebellar symptoms predominant type MSA (MSA-C) and 29.9% were diagnosed with parkinsonism predominant type MSA (MSA-P). UMSARS Part Ⅳ score of 4 or 5 accounted for 53.8% of participants. The higher the UMSARS Part Ⅳ score, the higher the proportion of MSA-P. At baseline, levodopa was used by 69 patients (37.5%) and the average levodopa dose was 406.7 mg/day. The frequency of levodopa use increased over time. Eleven cases changed from MSA-C to MSA-P during the study, but the opposite was not observed. Information about survival and causes of death was collected on 54 cases. Half of deaths were respiratory-related. Sudden death was recorded even in the group with UMSARS Part Ⅳ score of 1.Conclusions This study is the first large-scale prospective MSA cohort study in Asia. MSA-C was dominant, but the use of antiparkinsonian drugs increased over the study period. Changes from MSA-C to MSA-P occurred, but not vice versa