Implementation of quality indicators for vulvar cancer in gynaecological cancer centres certified by the German Cancer Society (DKG).

PURPOSE: In 2018, the first guideline-based quality indicators (QI) for vulvar cancer were implemented in the data-sheets of certified gynaecological cancer centres. The certification process includes guideline-based QIs as a fundamental component. These indicators are specifically designed to evaluate the level of care provided within the centres. This article aims to give an overview of the developing process of guideline based-QIs for women with vulvar cancer and presents the QIs results from the certified gynaecological cancer centres. METHODS: The QIs were derived in a standardized multiple step process during the update of the 2015 S2k guideline "Diagnosis, Therapy, and Follow-Up Care of Vulvar Cancer and its Precursors" (registry-number: no. 015/059) and are based on strong recommendations. RESULTS: In total, there are eight guideline-based QIs for vulvar cancer. Four QIs are part of the certification process. In the treatment year 2021, 2.466 cases of vulvar cancer were treated in 177 centres. The target values in the centres for pathology reports on tumour resection and lymphadenectomy as well as sentinel lymph nodes have increased since the beginning of the certification process and have been above 90% over the past three treatment years (2019-2021). DISCUSSION: QIs based on strong guideline recommendations, play a crucial role in measuring and allowing to quantify essential aspects of patient care. By utilizing QIs, centres are able to identify areas for process optimization and draw informed conclusions. Over the years the quality of treatment of vulvar cancer patients measured by the QIs was improved. The certification system is continuously reviewed to enhance patient care even further by using the outcomes from QIs revaluation.

Multidisciplinary proactive e-consults to improve guideline-directed medical therapies for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease: an implementation study.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that multidisciplinary, proactive electronic consultation (MPE) could overcome barriers to prescribing guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an efficacy-implementation pilot study of MPE for T2D and CKD for primary care provider (PCP)-patient dyads at an academic health system. MPE included (1) a dashboard to identify patients without a prescription for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and without a maximum dose prescription for renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi), (2) a multidisciplinary team of specialists to provide recommendations using e-consult templates, and (3) a workflow to deliver timely e-consult recommendations to PCPs. In-depth interviews were conducted with PCPs and specialists to assess feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of MPE and were analyzed using an iterative qualitative analysis approach to identify major themes. Prescription data were extracted from the electronic health record to assess preliminary effectiveness to increase GDMT. RESULTS: 20 PCPs agreed to participate, 18 PCPs received MPEs for one of their patients with T2D and CKD, and 16 PCPs and 2 specialists were interviewed. Major themes were as follows: appropriateness of prioritization of GDMT for T2D and CKD, acceptability of the content of the recommendations, PCP characteristics impact experience with MPE, acceptability and appropriateness of multidisciplinary collaboration, feasibility of MPE to overcome patient-specific barriers to GDMT, and appropriateness of workflow. At 6 months postbaseline, 7/18 (39%) patients were newly prescribed an SGLT2i, and 7/18 (39%) patients were either newly prescribed or had increased dose of RAASi. CONCLUSIONS: MPE was an acceptable and appropriate health system strategy to identify and address gaps in GDMT among patients with T2D and CKD. Adopting MPE could enhance GDMT, though PCPs raised feasibility concerns which could be improved with program enhancements, including follow-up e-consults for reinforcement, and administrative support for navigating system-level barriers.

Best Practices and Recommendations for Research Using Virtual Real-Time Data Collection: Protocol for Virtual Data Collection Studies.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent need for social distancing required the immediate pivoting of research modalities. Research that had previously been conducted in person had to pivot to remote data collection. Researchers had to develop data collection protocols that could be conducted remotely with limited or no evidence to guide the process. Therefore, the use of web-based platforms to conduct real-time research visits surged despite the lack of evidence backing these novel approaches. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to review the remote or virtual research protocols that have been used in the past 10 years, gather existing best practices, and propose recommendations for continuing to use virtual real-time methods when appropriate. METHODS: Articles (n=22) published from 2013 to June 2023 were reviewed and analyzed to understand how researchers conducted virtual research that implemented real-time protocols. "Real-time" was defined as data collection with a participant through a live medium where a participant and research staff could talk to each other back and forth in the moment. We excluded studies for the following reasons: (1) studies that collected participant or patient measures for the sole purpose of engaging in a clinical encounter; (2) studies that solely conducted qualitative interview data collection; (3) studies that conducted virtual data collection such as surveys or self-report measures that had no interaction with research staff; (4) studies that described research interventions but did not involve the collection of data through a web-based platform; (5) studies that were reviews or not original research; (6) studies that described research protocols and did not include actual data collection; and (7) studies that did not collect data in real time, focused on telehealth or telemedicine, and were exclusively intended for medical and not research purposes. RESULTS: Findings from studies conducted both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that many types of data can be collected virtually in real time. Results and best practice recommendations from the current protocol review will be used in the design and implementation of a substudy to provide more evidence for virtual real-time data collection over the next year. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that virtual real-time visits are doable across a range of participant populations and can answer a range of research questions. Recommended best practices for virtual real-time data collection include (1) providing adequate equipment for real-time data collection, (2) creating protocols and materials for research staff to facilitate or guide participants through data collection, (3) piloting data collection, (4) iteratively accepting feedback, and (5) providing instructions in multiple forms. The implementation of these best practices and recommendations for future research are further discussed in the paper. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53790.

Recent clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain: a global comparison.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a significant health problem worldwide, with a lifetime prevalence of 84% in the general adult population. To rationalise the management of LBP, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been issued in various countries around the world. This study aims to identify and compare the recommendations of recent CPGs for the management of LBP across the world. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and major guideline databases were searched from 2017 to 2022 to identify CPGs. CPGs focusing on information regarding the management and/or treatment of non-specific LBP were considered eligible. The quality of included guidelines was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. RESULTS: Our analysis identified a total of 22 CPGs that met the inclusion criteria, and were of middle and high methodological quality as assessed by the AGREE II tool. The guidelines exhibited heterogeneity in their recommendations, particularly in the approach to different stages of LBP. For acute LBP, the guidelines recommended the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), therapeutic exercise, staying active, and spinal manipulation. For subacute LBP, the guidelines recommended the use of NSAIDs, therapeutic exercise, staying active, and spinal manipulation. For chronic LBP, the guidelines recommended therapeutic exercise, the use of NSAIDs, spinal manipulation, and acupuncture. CONCLUSIONS: Current CPGs provide recommendations for almost all major aspects of the management of LBP, but there is marked heterogeneity between them. Some recommendations lack clarity and overlap with other treatments within the guidelines.

Induction therapy in heart transplantation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis for developing evidence-based recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Induction therapy (IT) utility in heart transplantation (HT) remains contested. Commissioned by a clinical-practice guidelines panel to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IT in adult HT patients, we conducted this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: We searched for studies from January 2000 to October 2022, reporting on the use of any IT agent in adult HT patients. Based on patient-important outcomes, we performed frequentist NMAs separately for RCTs and observational studies with adjusted analyses, and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework. RESULTS: From 5156 publications identified, we included 7 RCTs and 12 observational studies, and report on two contemporarily-used IT agents-basiliximab and rATG. The RCTs provide only very low certainty evidence and was uninformative of the effect of the two agents versus no IT or one another. With low certainty in the evidence from observational studies, basiliximab may increase 30-day (OR 1.13; 95% CI 1.06-1.20) and 1-year (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.02-1.22) mortality compared to no IT. With low certainty from observational studies, rATG may decrease 5-year cardiac allograft vasculopathy (OR .82; 95% CI .74-.90) compared to no IT, as well as 30-day (OR .85; 95% CI .80-.92), 1-year (OR .87; 95% CI .79-.96), and overall (HR .84; 95% CI .76-.93) mortality compared to basiliximab. CONCLUSION: With low and very low certainty in the synthetized evidence, these NMAs suggest possible superiority of rATG compared to basiliximab, but do not provide compelling evidence for the routine use of these agents in HT recipients.

Long term care facilities in England during the COVID-19 pandemic-a scoping review of guidelines, policy and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The disproportionate effect of COVID-19 on long term care facility (LTCF) residents has highlighted the need for clear, consistent guidance on the management of pandemics in such settings. As research exploring the experiences of LTCFs during the pandemic and the implications of mass hospital discharge, restricting staff movement, and limiting visitation from relatives are emerging, an in-depth review of policies, guidance and recommendations issued during this time could facilitate wider understanding in this area. AIMS: To identify policies, guidance, and recommendations related to LTCF staff and residents, in England issued by the government during the COVID-19 pandemic, developing a timeline of key events and synthesizing the policy aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes. METHOD: A scoping review of publicly available policy documents, guidance, and recommendations related to COVID-19 in LTCFs in England, identified using systematic searches of UK government websites. The main aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes reported in included documents were extracted. Data was analysed using thematic synthesis following a three-stage approach: coding the text, grouping codes into descriptive themes, and development of analytical themes. RESULTS: Thirty-three key policy documents were included in the review. Six areas of recommendations were identified: infection prevention and control, hospital discharge, testing and vaccination, staffing, visitation and continuing routine care. Seven areas of implementation were identified: funding, collaborative working, monitoring and data collection, reducing workload, decision making and leadership, training and technology, and communication. DISCUSSION: LTCFs remain complex settings, and it is imperative that lessons are learned from the experiences during COVID-19 to ensure that future pandemics are managed appropriately. This review has synthesized the policies issued during this time, however, the extent to which such guidance was communicated to LTCFs, and subsequently implemented, in addition to being effective, requires further research. In particular, understanding the secondary effects of such policies and how they can be introduced within the existing challenges inherent to adult social care, need addressing.

Levels of evidence and grades of recommendation supporting European society for medical oncology clinical practice guidelines.

Background: The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines are among the most comprehensive and widely used clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) globally. However, the level of scientific evidence supporting ESMO CPG recommendations has not been systematically investigated. This study assessed ESMO CPG levels of evidence (LOE) and grades of recommendations (GOR), as well as their trends over time across various cancer settings. Methods: We manually extracted every recommendation with the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) classification from each CPG. We examined the distribution of LOE and GOR in all available ESMO CPG guidelines across different topics and cancer types. Results: Among the 1,823 recommendations in the current CPG, 30% were classified as LOE I, and 43% were classified as GOR A. Overall, there was a slight decrease in LOE I (-2%) and an increase in the proportion of GOR A (+1%) in the current CPG compared to previous versions. The proportion of GOR A recommendations based on higher levels of evidence such as randomized trials (LOE I-II) shows a decrease (71% vs. 63%, p = 0.009) while recommendations based on lower levels of evidence (LOE III-V) show an increase (29% vs. 37%, p = 0.01) between previous and current version. In the current versions, the highest proportion of LOE I (42%) was found in recommendations related to pharmacotherapy, while the highest proportion of GOR A recommendations was found in the areas of pathology (50%) and diagnostic (50%) recommendations. Significant variability in LOE I and GOR A recommendations and their changes over time was observed across different cancer types. Conclusion: One-third of the current ESMO CPG recommendations are supported by the highest level of evidence. More well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed to increase the proportion of LOE I and GOR A recommendations, ultimately leading to improved outcomes for cancer patients.

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for adult obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are crucial in standardizing the management of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults. However, there has been insufficient evaluation of the overall quality of CPGs for adult OSA. This review aimed to comprehensively assess the overall quality of CPGs in the field of adult OSA. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on various literature databases, guideline-related databases, and academic websites from January 2013 to December 2023 to select CPGs relevant to adult OSA. The methodological and reporting quality of the eligible CPGs were thoroughly appraised by three reviewers using the AGREE II instrument and RIGHT checklist, respectively. RESULTS: This review included 44 CPGs, consisting of 42 CPGs in English and 2 CPGs in Chinese. The assessment of methodological quality revealed that four domains attained an average standardized score above 60%. Among the domains, "clarity of presentation" received the highest standardized score of 85.10%, while the lowest standardized score was observed in the "rigor of development" domain with the value of 56.77%. The evaluation of reporting quality indicated an overall reporting rate of 51.30% for the eligible CPGs, with only three domains achieving an average reporting rate higher than 50%. The domain with the highest reporting rate was "basic information" at 60.61%, while the domain with the lowest reporting rate was "review and quality assurance" at 15.91%. Furthermore, a significantly positive correlation was found between the AGREE II standardized scores and the RIGHT reporting rates (r = 0.808, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of the currently available guidelines for adult OSA demonstrated considerable variability. Researchers should prioritize the utilization of evidence-based methods and adhere to the items listed in the RIGHT checklist when developing CPGs to enhance efficient clinical decision-making and promote the translation of evidence into practice.