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.

Appropriateness of respiratory care: evidence-based guidelines.

PRINCIPLES: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve the appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians and health service researchers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was conducted based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. A working group prepared proposals for recommendations which were then independently rated by a multidisciplinary expert panel. All recommendations were then discussed in common and indications for procedures were rated confidentially a second time by the experts. The recommendations were then formulated on the basis of the level of evidence in the literature and on the consensus among these experts. RESULTS: Recommendations were formulated for the following procedures: non-invasive ventilation, continuous positive airway pressure, intermittent positive pressure breathing, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, mechanical insufflation-exsufflation, incentive spirometry, positive expiratory pressure, nasotracheal suctioning and non-instrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of the evidence from the literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus among the experts. CONCLUSION: Despite a marked heterogeneity of scientific evidence, the method used allowed us to develop commonly agreed local guidelines for respiratory care. In addition, this work fostered a closer relationship between physiotherapists and physicians in our institution.

Delirium: guidelines for general hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Delirium is highly prevalent in general hospitals but remains underrecognized and undertreated despite its association with increased morbidity, mortality, and health services utilization. To enhance its management, we developed guidelines covering all aspects, from risk factor identification to preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic interventions in adult patients. METHODS: Guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCT), and cohort studies were systematically searched and evaluated. Based on a synthesis of retrieved high-quality documents, recommendation items were submitted to a multidisciplinary expert panel. Experts scored the appropriateness of recommendation items, using an evidence-based, explicit, multidisciplinary panel approach. Each recommendation was graded according to this process' results. RESULTS: Rated recommendations were mostly supported by a low level of evidence (1.3% RCT and systematic reviews, 14.3% nonrandomized trials vs. 84.4% observational studies or expert opinions). Nevertheless, 71.1% of recommendations were considered appropriate by the experts. Prevention of delirium and its nonpharmacological management should be fostered. Haloperidol remains the first-choice drug, whereas the role of atypical antipsychotics is still uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: While many topics addressed in these guidelines have not yet been adequately studied, an explicit panel and evidence-based approach allowed the proposal of comprehensive recommendations for the prevention and management of delirium in general hospitals.

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.

Major depressive disorder in the general hospital: adaptation of clinical practice guidelines.

Major Depressive Disorder is particularly frequent among physically ill inpatients. Despite the considerable human burden and financial costs, Major Depressive Disorder remains under-detected and under-treated. To improve this situation, clinical practice guidelines for the management of Major Depressive Disorder were developed for patients in the general hospital. They were adapted from existing good quality guidelines. A literature search has been conducted to identify guidelines and systematic reviews about the management of Major Depressive Disorder. The quality of the existing guidelines was evaluated by means of the AGREE instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation). Complementary literature searches were necessary to answer questions such as "depression and physical illness" or "antidepressants and somatic medication". The guidelines were discussed by a multidisciplinary internal panel. The final version was reviewed by an external panel. This paper presents the development process and a summary of these guidelines for the management of Major Depressive Disorder. The adaptation of good quality guidelines to local needs requires much time, effort and skills. Easier ways for the adaptation and use of high quality guidelines at the local level may result from better coordination, organization and updating of guidelines at a national or supranational level.