The systematic guideline review: method, rationale, and test on chronic heart failure

Background: Evidence-based guidelines have the potential to improve healthcare. However, their de-novo-development requires substantial resources-especially for complex conditions, and adaptation may be biased by contextually influenced recommendations in source guidelines. In this paper we describe a new approach to guideline development-the systematic guideline review method (SGR), and its application in the development of an evidence-based guideline for family physicians on chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: A systematic search for guidelines was carried out. Evidence-based guidelines on CHF management in adults in ambulatory care published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2004 were included. Guidelines on acute or right heart failure were excluded. Eligibility was assessed by two reviewers, methodological quality of selected guidelines was appraised using the AGREE instrument, and a framework of relevant clinical questions for diagnostics and treatment was derived. Data were extracted into evidence tables, systematically compared by means of a consistency analysis and synthesized in a preliminary draft. Most relevant primary sources were re-assessed to verify the cited evidence. Evidence and recommendations were summarized in a draft guideline. Results: Of 16 included guidelines five were of good quality. A total of 35 recommendations were systematically compared: 25/35 were consistent, 9/35 inconsistent, and 1/35 un-rateable (derived from a single guideline). Of the 25 consistencies, 14 were based on consensus, seven on evidence and four differed in grading. Major inconsistencies were found in 3/9 of the inconsistent recommendations. We re-evaluated the evidence for 17 recommendations (evidence-based, differing evidence levels and minor inconsistencies) - the majority was congruent. Incongruity was found where the stated evidence could not be verified in the cited primary sources, or where the evaluation in the source guidelines focused on treatment benefits and underestimated the risks. The draft guideline was completed in 8.5 man-months. The main limitation to this study was the lack of a second reviewer. Conclusion: The systematic guideline review including framework development, consistency analysis and validation is an effective, valid, and resource saving-approach to the development of evidence-based guidelines

Major depressive disorders in the general hospital: how to implement guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: An implementation study that evaluated the impact of previously adopted guidelines on the clinical practice of medical residents was conducted to improve the recognition and treatment of major depressive disorders (MDDs) in hospitalized patients with somatic diseases. METHODS: Guidelines were implemented in two wards (ENT and oncology) using intranet diffusion, interactive sessions with medical residents, and support material. Discharge letters of 337 and 325 patients, before and after the intervention, respectively, were checked for statement of diagnosis or treatment of MDDs and, in a post hoc analysis, for any mention about psychiatric management. RESULTS: No difference was found in the number of diagnosed or treated MDDs before and after the intervention. However, significantly more statements about psychological status (29/309 vs. 13/327) and its management (36/309 vs. 19/327) were observed after the intervention (P<.01). CONCLUSION: The intervention was not successful in improving the management of MDDs. However, a possible effect on general psychological aspects of medical diseases was observed

La dépression majeure en hôpital général: adaptation et mise en oeuvre de recommandations pour la pratique clinique [Major depression in the general hospital: adaptation and implementation of guidelines]

Major depression IMD) is highly prevalent in the general hospital and adds a considerable burden to affected patients, but remains under detected and under treated. In an attempt to improve this situation, existing guidelines on MD were retrieved, systematically evaluated with the instrument AGREE (Appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation), and adapted to the needs of the general hospital. These guidelines were made available on intranet, and actively implemented in two wards, where their impact on clinical practice was evaluated

Alexithymia in cancer patients: review of the literature.

Objective: To summarize the literature on alexithymia in cancer patients. Methods: The empirical literature published between 1972 and January 2010 was searched through MEDLINE, PSYINFO, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Key words were: alexithymia, affective symptoms, cancer, neoplasms. Results: The search identified 16 relevant studies which are methodologically problematic and show conflicting results. However, several interesting hypotheses emerge such as a possible link between alexithymia and the immune system, between alexithymia and quality of life, or between alexithymia, anxiety and depression. The question to what degree alexithymia in cancer patients is a trait or a state cannot be answered by these studies. Conclusions: A lack of methodologically sound studies and the large variations of results among studies suggest that the role of alexithymia in patients with cancer deserves more systematic research. Consequently, studies are needed which investigate the nature (state or trait) of alexithymia, its impact on cancer development and progression, as well as its influence on compliance and on the underestimation of psychological distress and psychiatric outcome in cancer patients

Discriminant validity and test-retest reliability of a self-administered Internet-based questionnaire testing doctors' knowledge in evidence-based medicine.

Aims and objectives  This study aimed to determine the discriminant validity and the test-retest reliability of a questionnaire testing the impact of evidence-based medicine (EBM) training on doctors' knowledge and skills. Methods  Questionnaires were sent electronically to all doctors working as residents and chief residents in two French speaking hospital networks in Switzerland. Participants completed the questionnaire twice, within a 4-week interval. The discriminant validity was examined in comparing doctors' performance according to their reported EBM previous training. Proportion of agreement between both sessions of the questionnaire, Cohen's kappa and 'uniform kappa' determined its test-retest reliability. Results  The participation rate was 9.8%/7.1% to first/second session. Performance increased according to the level of doctors' previous training in EBM. The observed proportion of agreement between both sessions was over 70% for 14/19 questions, and the 'uniform kappa' was superior to 0.60 for 15/19 questions. Conclusion  The discriminant validity and test-retest reliability of the questionnaire were satisfying. The low participation rate did not prevent the study from achieving its aims