Youth-Friendly Family Planning Services for Young People: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: "Youth-friendly" family planning services, services tailored to meet the particular sexual and reproductive health needs of young people (aged 10-24 years), may improve reproductive health outcomes, including reduction of unintended pregnancy. The objectives of this systematic review were to summarize the evidence of the effect of youth-friendly family planning services on reproductive health outcomes and to describe key characteristics of youth-friendly family planning interventions. The review, conducted in 2011, was used to inform national recommendations on quality family planning services. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Several electronic bibliographic databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, and Popline, were used to identify relevant articles published from January 1985 through February 2011. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Nineteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six evaluated outcomes relevant to unintended pregnancy, contraceptive use, and knowledge or patient satisfaction. The 13 remaining studies identified perspectives on youth-friendly characteristics. Of the studies examining outcomes, most had a positive effect (two of three for unintended pregnancy, three of three for contraceptive use, and three of three for knowledge and/or patient satisfaction). Remaining studies described nine key characteristics of youth-friendly family planning services. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that there is limited evidence that youth-friendly services may improve reproductive health outcomes for young people and identifies service characteristics that might increase their receptivity to using these services. Although more rigorous studies are needed, the interventions and characteristics identified in this review should be considered in the development and evaluation of youth-friendly family planning interventions in clinical settings.

Confidentiality in Family Planning Services for Young People: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Family planning services are essential for reducing high rates of unintended pregnancies among young people, yet a perception that providers will not preserve confidentiality may deter youth from accessing these services. This systematic review, conducted in 2011, summarizes the evidence on the effect of assuring confidentiality in family planning services to young people on reproductive health outcomes. The review was used to inform national recommendations on providing quality family planning services. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Multiple databases were searched to identify articles addressing confidentiality in family planning services to youth aged 10-24 years. Included studies were published from January 1985 through February 2011. Studies conducted outside the U.S., Canada, Europe, Australia, or New Zealand, and those that focused exclusively on HIV or sexually transmitted diseases, were excluded. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The search strategy identified 19,332 articles, nine of which met the inclusion criteria. Four studies examined outcomes. Examined outcomes included use of clinical services and intention to use services. Of the four outcome studies, three found a positive association between assurance of confidentiality and at least one outcome of interest. Five studies provided information on youth perspectives and underscored the idea that young people greatly value confidentiality when receiving family planning services. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that there is limited research examining whether confidentiality in family planning services to young people affects reproductive health outcomes. A robust research agenda is needed, given the importance young people place on confidentiality.

The development of evidence-based prehospital guidelines using a GRADE-based methodology.

BACKGROUND: The burgeoning literature in prehospital care creates an opportunity to improve care through evidence-based guidelines (EBGs). Previously, an established process for the creation of such guidelines and adoption and implementation at the local level was lacking. This has led to great variability in the content of prehospital protocols in different jurisdictions across the globe. Recently the Federal Interagency Committee on Emergency Medical Services (FICEMS) and the National EMS Advisory Council (NEMSAC) approved a National Prehospital Evidence-based Guideline Model Process for the development, implementation, and evaluation of EBGs. The Model Process recommends the use of established guideline development tools such as Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Objective. To describe the process of development of three prehospital EBGs using the National Prehospital EBG Model Process (EBG Model Process) and the GRADE EBG development tool. METHODS: We conducted three unique iterations of the EBG Model Process utilizing the GRADE EBG development tool. The process involved 6 distinct and essential steps, including 1) assembling the expert panel and providing GRADE training; 2) defining the evidence-based guideline (EBG) content area and establishing the specific clinical questions to address in patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) format; 3) prioritizing outcomes to facilitate systematic literature searches; 4) creating GRADE tables, or evidence profiles, for each PICO question; 5) vetting and endorsing GRADE evidence tables and drafting recommendations; and 6) synthesizing recommendations into an EMS protocol and visual algorithm. Feedback and suggestions for improvement were solicited from participants and relevant stakeholders in the process. RESULTS: We successfully used the process to create three separate prehospital evidence-based guidelines, formatted into decision tree algorithms with levels of evidence and graded recommendations assigned to each decision point. However, the process revealed itself to be resource intensive, and most of the suggestions for improvement would require even more resource utilization. CONCLUSIONS: The National Prehospital EBG Model Process can be used to create credible, transparent, and usable prehospital evidence-based guidelines. We suggest that a centralized or regionalized approach be used to create and maintain a full set of prehospital EBGs as a means of optimizing resource use.

An Evidence-based Guideline for the air medical transportation of prehospital trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Decisions about the transportation of trauma patients by helicopter are often not well informed by research assessing the risks, benefits, and costs of such transport. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this evidence-based guideline (EBG) is to recommend a strategy for the selection of prehospital trauma patients who would benefit most from aeromedical transportation. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel was recruited consisting of experts in trauma, EBG development, and emergency medical services (EMS) outcomes research. Representatives of the Federal Interagency Committee on Emergency Medical Services (FICEMS), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) (funding agency), and the Children's National Medical Center (investigative team) also contributed to the process. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to guide question formulation, evidence retrieval, appraisal/synthesis, and formulate recommendations. The process followed the National Evidence-Based Guideline Model Process, which has been approved by the Federal Interagency Committee on EMS and the National EMS Advisory Council. RESULTS: Two strong and three weak recommendations emerged from the process, all supported only by low or very low quality evidence. The panel strongly recommended that the 2011 CDC Guideline for the Field Triage of Injured Patients be used as the initial step in the triage process, and that ground emergency medical services (GEMS) be used for patients not meeting CDC anatomic, physiologic, and situational high-acuity criteria. The panel issued a weak recommendation to use helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) for higher-acuity patients if there is a time-savings versus GEMS, or if an appropriate hospital is not accessible by GEMS due to systemic/logistical factors. The panel strongly recommended that online medical direction should not be required for activating HEMS. Special consideration was given to the potential need for local adaptation. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic and transparent methodology was used to develop an evidence-based guideline for the transportation of prehospital trauma patients. The recommendations provide specific guidance regarding the activation of GEMS and HEMS for patients of varying acuity. Future research is required to strengthen the data and recommendations, define optimal approaches for guideline implementation, and determine the impact of implementation on safety and outcomes including cost.

An Evidence-based Guideline for prehospital analgesia in trauma.

BACKGROUND: The management of acute traumatic pain is a crucial component of prehospital care and yet the assessment and administration of analgesia is highly variable, frequently suboptimal, and often determined by consensus-based regional protocols. OBJECTIVE: To develop an evidence-based guideline (EBG) for the clinical management of acute traumatic pain in adults and children by advanced life support (ALS) providers in the prehospital setting. Methods. We recruited a multi-stakeholder panel with expertise in acute pain management, guideline development, health informatics, and emergency medical services (EMS) outcomes research. Representatives of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (sponsoring agency) and a major children's research center (investigative team) also contributed to the process. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to guide the process of question formulation, evidence retrieval, appraisal/synthesis, and formulation of recommendations. The process also adhered to the National Prehospital Evidence-Based Guideline (EBG) model process approved by the Federal Interagency Council for EMS and the National EMS Advisory Council. RESULTS: Four strong and three weak recommendations emerged from the process; two of the strong recommendations were linked to high- and moderate-quality evidence, respectively. The panel recommended that all patients be considered candidates for analgesia, regardless of transport interval, and that opioid medications should be considered for patients in moderate to severe pain. The panel also recommended that all patients should be reassessed at frequent intervals using a standardized pain scale and that patients should be re-dosed if pain persists. The panel suggested the use of specific age-appropriate pain scales. CONCLUSION: GRADE methodology was used to develop an evidence-based guideline for prehospital analgesia in trauma. The panel issued four strong recommendations regarding patient assessment and narcotic medication dosing. Future research should define optimal approaches for implementation of the guideline as well as the impact of the protocol on safety and effectiveness metrics.

The implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based statewide prehospital pain management protocol developed using the national prehospital evidence-based guideline model process for emergency medical services.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration funded the development of a model process for the development and implementation of evidence-based guidelines (EBGs) for emergency medical services (EMS). We report on the implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based prehospital pain management protocol developed using this model process. METHODS: An evidence-based protocol for prehospital management of pain resulting from injuries and burns was reviewed by the Protocol Review Committee (PRC) of the Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems (MIEMSS). The PRC recommended revisions to the Maryland protocol that reflected recommendations in the EBG: weight-based dosing and repeat dosing of morphine. A training curriculum was developed and implemented using Maryland's online Learning Management System and successfully accessed by 3,941 paramedics and 15,969 BLS providers. Field providers submitted electronic patient care reports to the MIEMSS statewide prehospital database. Inclusion criteria were injured or burned patients transported by Maryland ambulances to Maryland hospitals whose electronic patient care records included data for level of EMS provider training during a 12-month preimplementation period and a 12-month postimplementation period from September 2010 through March 2012. We compared the percentage of patients receiving pain scale assessments and morphine, as well as the dose of morphine administered and the use of naloxone as a rescue medication for opiate use, before and after the protocol change. RESULTS: No differences were seen in the percentage of patients who had a pain score documented or the percent of patients receiving morphine before and after the protocol change, but there was a significant increase in the total dose and dose in mg/kg administered per patient. During the postintervention phase, patients received an 18% higher total morphine dose and a 14.9% greater mg/kg dose. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the implementation of a revised statewide prehospital pain management protocol based on an EBG developed using the National Prehospital Evidence-based Guideline Model Process was associated with an increase in dosing of narcotic pain medication consistent with that recommended by the EBG. No differences were seen in the percentage of patients receiving opiate analgesia or in the documentation of pain scores.

An Evidence-based Guideline for Pediatric Prehospital Seizure Management Using GRADE Methodology.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this guideline is to recommend evidence-based practices for timely prehospital pediatric seizure cessation while avoiding respiratory depression and seizure recurrence. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel was chosen based on expertise in pediatric emergency medicine, prehospital medicine, and/or evidence-based guideline development. The panel followed the National Prehospital EBG Model using the GRADE methodology to formulate questions, retrieve evidence, appraise the evidence, and formulate recommendations. The panel members initially searched the literature in 2009 and updated their searches in 2012. The panel finalized a draft of a patient care algorithm in 2012 that was presented to stakeholder organizations to gather feedback for necessary revisions. RESULTS: Five strong and ten weak recommendations emerged from the process; all but one was supported by low or very low quality evidence. The panel sought to ensure that the recommendations promoted timely seizure cessation while avoiding respiratory depression and seizure recurrence. The panel recommended that all patients in an active seizure have capillary blood glucose checked and be treated with intravenous (IV) dextrose or intramuscular (IM) glucagon if <60 mg/dL (3 mmol/L). The panel also recommended that non-IV routes (buccal, IM, or intranasal) of benzodiazepines (0.2 mg/kg) be used as first-line therapy for status epilepticus, rather than the rectal route. CONCLUSIONS: Using GRADE methodology, we have developed a pediatric seizure guideline that emphasizes the role of capillary blood glucometry and the use of buccal, IM, or intranasal benzodiazepines over IV or rectal routes. Future research is needed to compare the effectiveness and safety of these medication routes.