practice guidelines
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Practice Guidelines

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 28

Practice Guidelines - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 147 Views
  • Uploaded on

Practice Guidelines. The Good, The Not-So-Good The Ugly. 1. Where do practice guidelines come from?. Trust us, we’re the experts : Opinion-based/ consensus guidelines Whose opinion? Do they have a conflict of interest? What is their perspective?

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Practice Guidelines' - davis


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
practice guidelines
Practice Guidelines

The Good,

The Not-So-Good

The Ugly

1

where do practice guidelines come from
Where do practice guidelines come from?

Trust us, we’re the experts: Opinion-based/ consensus guidelines

Whose opinion? Do they have a conflict of interest? What is their perspective?

Trust us, we have the evidence: “Evidence-based”

How was the evidence used? Patient-oriented? Values?

Evidence-linked:

Here is how we found the evidence, used the evidence

Strength of recommendation noted

guidelines ultimately a social exercise
Guidelines: Ultimately a social exercise
  • Evidence: It is what it is
  • The human touch:
    • Social judgment layered on top of the evidence

3

how they arrived at these conclusions
How They Arrived at these Conclusions
  • Meta-analysis of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
    • Invited a total of 348,219 women at age 40 yrs for yearly screening
    • 0-3 studies, individually, showed a decrease in breast cancer mortality
    • Meta-analysis: Combining results from all trials and analyzing the results
    • Results:
slide6
Figure. Nelson HD. Screening for breast cancer: An update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:727-737.
benefits 10 000 women ages 40 49 yrs screened yearly
Benefits10,000 women ages 40-49 yrs screened yearly

USPSTF Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151(10):716-726

breast cancer mortality vs all causes of mortality all ages
Breast cancer mortality vs all causes of mortality, all ages

Black WC, et al. All-Cause Mortality in Randomized Trials of Cancer Screening. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 94, No. 3, 167-173, February 6, 2002

slide12
Causes of death in women, by age

Bunker JP, Houghton J, Baum M. Putting the risk of breast cancer in perspective. BMJ 1998;317:1307-9.

but what about 1 in 8
But What About “1-in-8”?

Ave lifespan = 79 years

Bunker JP, et al. Putting the risk of breast cancer in perspective. BMJ 1998;317:1307-9.

risks 10 000 women ages 40 49 yrs screened yearly
Risks10,000 women ages 40-49 yrs screened yearly

USPSTF Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151(10):716-726

pseudodisease overdiagnosis
Pseudodisease (overdiagnosis)

Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2009;CD001877 doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub3

  • A condition that looks just like the disease, but never would have bothered the patient
    • Disease that would never cause symptoms
    • Asymptomatic disease in people who will die from another cause before disease presents
  • An estimated 10%-30% of breast cancers found and treated would have never affected the patients
    • The question: which ones?
overdiagnosis bias
Overdiagnosis bias

Gigerenzer G, et al. Helping doctors and patients make sense of health statistics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 2008;8(2):53-96.

evaluating screening tests
Evaluating Screening Tests

Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88-94

Evidence

  • Sensitivity &specificity
  • Does it change diagnoses?
  • Does it change treatment?
  • Does it change outcomes?

Judgment:

Is it worthwhile (to an individual and/or society)?

can we trust guidelines from specialty societies

Can We Trust Guidelines from Specialty Societies?

Or

Never ask a barber if you need a haircut

18

slide19

“. . . The guild of health care professionals – including their specialty societies – has a primary responsibility to promote its members’ interests. . .

Quanstrum KH, Hayward RA. Lessons from the mammography wars. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:1076-1079

19

slide20

. . . It is a fool’s dream to expect the guild of any service industry to harness its self-interest and to act according to beneficence alone – to compete on true value when the opportunity to inflate perceived value is readily available.”

Quanstrum KH, Hayward RA. Lessons from the mammography wars. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:1076-1079

20

screening for breast cancer yearly at age 40
Screening for breast cancer: yearly at age 40
  • American College of Radiology
  • Society of Breast Imaging
  • American Society of Breast Disease
  • American Cancer Society
  • ACOG
evidence based and the evolution of evidence subclinical hypothyroidism
“Evidence-based” and the evolution of evidence: subclinical hypothyroidism

Step 1

Search of 10 databases

Studies summarized

12 experts rated the evidence

Recommendations:

“Recommend against routine screening for subclinical hypothyroidism”

“Recommend against routine treatment of 4.5 – 10.0 mIU/L”

Surks MI, et al. Subclinical thyroid disease. Scientific Review and Guidelines for diagnosis and management. JAMA 2004;291:228-238.

evidence based and the evolution of evidence subclinical hypothyroidism1
“Evidence-based” and the evolution of evidence: subclinical hypothyroidism

Step 2:

Consensus meeting among members of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The American Thyroid Association, and The Endocrine Society.

New recommendation statement

Recommendations sent to leadership of the organizations

the evolution of evidence subclinical hypothyroidism
The evolution of evidence: subclinical hypothyroidism

The result:

New recommendations from the three societies:

Most patients with TSH levels 4.5 – 10 mIU/L should be treated

Shouldperform routine screening for subclinical hypothyroidism

Why?

“Although good evidence is unavailable [to support our recommendation], there is a sizable amount of fair evidence and an abundance of opinion by experts . . . The [scientific panel recommendations] are contrary to the practice of many. . . experts”

Gharib H, et al. Consensus statement: Subclinical thyroid dysfunction: A joint statement on management from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The American Thyroid Association, and The Endocrine Society. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005;90:581-5.

bilirubin in term infants sept 2009
Bilirubin in term infants (Sept 2009)

USPSTF: Summary of Recommendation

“The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concludes that the evidence is insufficient to recommend screening infants for hyperbilirubinemia to prevent chronic bilirubin encephalopathy”

American Academy of Pediatrics Restatement and Clarification

“. . .We recommend universal predischarge bilirubin screening,which helps to assess the risk of subsequent severehyperbilirubinemia. We also recommend a more structured approachto management and follow-up according to the predischarge TSB/TcB,gestational age, and other risk factors for hyperbilirubinemia.These recommendations represent a consensus of expert opinionbased on the available evidence, and they are supported by severalindependent reviewers. Nevertheless, their efficacy in preventingkernicterus and their cost-effectiveness are unknown. “

evidence linked guidelines
Evidence Linked Guidelines

Brief Summary Statement for each recommendation

Detailed Discussion of the evidence

Long Reference section pointing to original research

Methods section showing how evidence was obtained and evaluated

slide27

Detailed overview of the evidence

Brief statement

Evidence table

Evidence Linked Guidelines

national guideline clearinghouse
National Guideline Clearinghouse

www.ngc.gov

Vetted guidelines from various groups

Standard organization so that information can be compared across various guidelines

28

ad