Development of an international glossary for clinical guidelines collaboration.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are often created through collaboration among organizations. The use of inconsistent terminology may cause poor communication and delays. This study aimed to develop a glossary of terms related to collaboration in guideline development. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A literature review of collaborative guidelines was performed to develop an initial list of terms related to guideline collaboration. The list of terms was presented to the members of the Guideline International Network Guidelines Collaboration Working Group, who provided presumptive definitions for each term and proposed additional terms to be included. The revised list was subsequently reviewed by an international, multidisciplinary panel of expert stakeholders. Recommendations received during this pre-Delphi review were implemented to augment an initial draft glossary. The glossary was then critically evaluated and refined through two rounds of Delphi surveys and a virtual consensus meeting with all panel members as Delphi participants. RESULTS: Forty-nine experts participated in the pre-Delphi survey, and 44 participated in the two-round Delphi process. Consensus was reached for 37 terms and definitions. CONCLUSION: Uptake and utilization of this guideline collaboration glossary by key organizations and stakeholder groups may facilitate collaboration among guideline-producing organizations by improving communication, minimizing conflicts, and increasing guideline development efficiency.

Diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea: 2019 Belgian National guideline for primary care.

OBJECTIVES: Gonorrhoea continues to be a public health concern in Belgium with pharyngeal and rectal infections increasing in persons with high-risk sexual behaviour. Belgian health care practitioners rely on international guidance when managing gonorrhoea resulting in non-adapted suboptimal care for the Belgian patient. This guideline will rectify this situation. METHODS: This guideline was developed following an evidence-based approach and involving a guideline development group (GDG). Research questions were prioritised by the GDG and researchers conducted a systematic review of the evidence that was assessed using GRADE approach. RESULTS: The guideline offers recommendations for gonorrhoea diagnosis, treatment and management for primary care professionals in Belgium and applies a risk group approach. This approach aims for improved identification of at-risk persons and targeted testing of at-risk groups; it includes behavioural questioning when deciding on diagnostic sampling and provides clear advice on treatment. The guideline defines when to add surveillance testing for antibiotic resistance, and what consists of good follow-up. RESULTS: A concerted application of this guideline by all stakeholders in Belgium may result in improving the diagnosis of infections and eventually addressing the emerging multi-drug resistance.

Diagnosis and treatment of syphilis: 2019 Belgian National guideline for primary care.

OBJECTIVES: In the last 10 years, Belgium and countries of the European Economic Area and other high-income countries observed an increasing trend in syphilis diagnoses. Men who have sex with men (MSM) are the most affected population explained by high rates of unprotected sex, a greater number of sexual partners, and risk compensation as a result of pre-exposure prophylaxis use. The 2019 European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) technical report on syphilis proposed interventions such as enhanced screening of specific populations at risk. This guideline will address these issues. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the evidence for diagnosing and treating syphilis. RESULTS: Based on the results, recommendations were formulated for primary health care professionals in Belgium. This syphilis guideline addresses prioritised testing, the sample and test for the diagnosis, the treatment of a person with syphilis including syphilis serology follow-up, and partner management. CONCLUSION: The identification and management of patients with syphilis will benefit from the application of this guideline.

Impact of solid cancer on in-hospital mortality overall and among different subgroups of patients with COVID-19: a nationwide, population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer. METHODS: We analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis). RESULTS: A total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (<60 years) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.41 to 3.64) among patients without other comorbidities. Severe event occurrence was similar in both groups (36.7% vs 28.8%; aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based analysis demonstrates that solid cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. This adverse effect was more pronounced among younger patients and those without other comorbidities. Patients with solid cancer should be prioritised in vaccination campaigns and in tailored containment measurements.