Consensus Guidelines for Oral Dosing of Primarily Renally Cleared Medications in Older Adults

OBJECTIVES: To establish consensus oral dosing guidelines for primarily renally cleared medications prescribed for older adults.
DESIGN: Literature search followed by a two-round modified Delphi survey.
SETTING: A nationally representative survey of experts in geriatric clinical pharmacy.
PARTICIPANTS: Eleven geriatric clinical pharmacists.
MEASUREMENTS: After a comprehensive literature search and review by an investigative group of six physicians (2 general internal medicine, 2 nephrology, 2 geriatrics), 43 dosing recommendations for 30 medications at various levels of renal function were created. The expert panel rated its agreement with each of these 43 dosing recommendations using a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Recommendation-specific means and 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Consensus was defined as a lower 95% confidence limit of greater than 4.0 for the recommendation-specific mean score.
RESULTS: The response rate was 81.8% (9/11) for the first round. All respondents who completed the first round also completed the second round. The expert panel reached consensus on 26 recommendations involving 18 (60%) medications. For 10 medications (chlorpropamide, colchicine, cotrimoxazole, glyburide, meperidine, nitrofurantoin, probenecid, propoxyphene, spironolactone, and triamterene), the consensus recommendation was not to use the medication in older adults below a specified level of renal function (e.g., creatinine clearance <30 mL/min). For the remaining eight medications (acyclovir, amantadine, ciprofloxacin, gabapentin, memantine, ranitidine, rimantadine, and valacyclovir), specific recommendations for dose reduction or interval extension were made.
CONCLUSION: An expert panel of geriatric clinical pharmacists was able to reach consensus agreement on a number of oral medications that are primarily renally cleared.     

Management of asymptomatic,well-differentiated PNETs: results of the Delphi consensus process of the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association

BackgroundVariation in the management of PNETs exist due to the limited high-level evidence to guide clinical practice. The aim of this work is to generate consensus guidelines with a Delphi process for managing PNETs.MethodsA panel of experts reviewed the surgical literature and scored a set of clinical case statements using a web-based survey to identify areas of agreement and disagreement. Results of the survey were discussed after each round of review. This cycle was repeated until no further likelihood of reaching consensus existed.ResultsTwenty-two case statements related to surgical indications, preoperative biopsy, extent of resection, type of surgery, and tumor location were scored. Using a pre-defined definition of consensus, the panel achieved consensus on the following: i) resection is not recommended for <1 cm lesions; ii) resection is recommended for lesions greater than 2 cm; iii) lymph node dissection is recommended for radiographically-suspicious nodes with splenectomy for distal lesions; iv) tumor enucleation and central pancreatectomy are acceptable when technically feasible. No consensus was reached regarding issues of preoperative biopsy or 1–2 cm tumors.ConclusionsUsing a structured, validated system for identifying consensus, an expert panel identified areas of agreement regarding critical management decisions for patients with PNET. Issues without consensus warrant additional clinical investigation.     

Quality of care indicators for gout management

OBJECTIVE: Despite the significant health impact of gout, there is no consensus on management standards. To guide physician practice, we sought to develop quality of care indicators for gout management. METHODS: A systematic literature review of gout therapy was performed using the Medline database. Two abstractors independently reviewed each of the articles for relevance and satisfaction of minimal inclusion criteria. Based on the review of the literature, 11 preliminary quality indicators were developed and then reviewed and refined by an initial feasibility panel of community and academic rheumatologists. A twelfth indicator was added at the request of the first panel. Using a modification of the RAND/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method (bridging teleconference and white-board Internet technology were added), a second expert panel rated each of the proposed indicators for validity using a 9-point scale, in which ratings of 1-3, 4-6, and 7-9 were considered "invalid," "indeterminate," and "highly valid," respectively. Indicators were considered valid if the median panel rating was > or =7 and there was no evidence of panel disagreement (defined to occur when 2 of 6 panelists provided a validity rating of 1-3 and 2 panelists provided a validity rating of 7-9). RESULTS: Ten of the 12 draft indicators were rated to be valid by our second expert panel. Validated indicators pertained to 1) the use of urate-lowering medications in chronic gout, 2) the use of antiinflammatory drugs, and 3) counseling on lifestyle modifications. CONCLUSION: Using a combination of evidence and expert opinion, 10 indicators for quality of gout care were developed. These indicators represent an important initial step in quality improvement initiatives for gout care.     

Guidelines in pulmonary medicine: a 25-year profile.

OBJECTIVE: We attempted to identify clinical practice guideline and pathway articles in the area of pulmonary medicine published in peer-reviewed journals since 1974. DESIGN: Review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database, Best Evidence, and Abstracts of Clinical Care Guidelines from January 1974 to December 1998. STUDY SELECTION: All articles contained relevant search terms for pulmonary topics and were included irrespective of setting (primary or specialty, inpatient or outpatient). Controlled and uncontrolled trials as well as observational studies and consensus opinion/statements were all identified. The articles were stratified by design as well as by pulmonary topic. DATA EXTRACTION: Limited data on study type, study focus, year of publication, and results of study were abstracted. RESULTS: Our criteria yielded 271 articles, including 115 consensus statements and expert opinion guidelines; 30 controlled studies, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews; and 126 uncontrolled trials and observational studies. Of these, 82 articles (30.3%) related to asthma, 46 articles (17.0%) related to COPD, and 36 articles (13.3%) related to pneumonia. In addition, we tracked the increasing publication of all guideline-related pulmonary articles; randomized, controlled trials (RCTs); systematic reviews; and consensus statements by year for the past 25 years. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary guidelines are increasingly published in peer-reviewed journals, but few are tested clinically in RCTs. There is continued reliance on consensus statements and expert opinion. Pulmonary guideline publications have continued to dramatically increase in number and in importance since 1974, both on the local level and internationally.     

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® on Renal Failure

Imaging plays a role in the management of patients with acute kidney injury or chronic kidney disease. However, clinical circumstances strongly impact the appropriateness of imaging use. In patients with newly detected renal dysfunction, ultrasonography can assess for reversible causes, assess renal size and echogenicity, and thus, establish the chronicity of disease. Urinary obstruction can be detected, but imaging is most useful in high-risk groups or in patients in whom there is a strong clinical suspicion for obstruction. Computed tomography, computed tomography or magnetic resonance arteriography, and percutaneous ultrasound-guided renal biopsy are valuable in other clinical situations. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.     

Need for criteria for the diagnosis and severity assessment of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines

The Tokyo Guidelines formulate clinical guidance for healthcare providers regarding the diagnosis, severity assessment, and treatment of acute cholangitis and acute cholecystitis. The Guidelines were developed through a comprehensive literature search and selection of evidence. Recommendations were based on the strength and quality of evidence. Expert consensus opinion was used to enhance or formulate important areas where data were insufficient. A working group, composed of gastroenterologists and surgeons with expertise in biliary tract surgery, supplemented with physicians in critical care medicine, epidemiology, and laboratory medicine, was selected to formulate draft guidelines. Several other groups (including members of the Japanese Society for Abdominal Emergency Medicine, the Japan Biliary Association, and the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery) have reviewed and revised the draft guidelines. To build a global consensus on the management of acute biliary infection, an international expert panel, representing experts in this area, was established. Between April 1 and 2, 2006, an International Consensus Meeting on acute biliary infections was held in Tokyo. A consensus was determined based on best available scientific evidence and discussion by the panel of experts. This report describes the highlights of the Tokyo International Consensus Meeting in 2006. Some important areas focused on at the meeting include proposals for internationally accepted diagnostic criteria and severity assessment for both clinical and research purposes.     

Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions : an evidence-based guideline

OBJECTIVE: A panel was convened by the Health and Science Policy Committee of the American College of Chest Physicians to develop a clinical practice guideline on the medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions (PPE) using evidence-based methods. OPTIONS AND OUTCOMES CONSIDERED: Based on consensus of clinical opinion, the expert panel developed an annotated table for evaluating the risk for poor outcome in patients with PPE. Estimates of the risk for poor outcome were based on the clinical judgment that, without adequate drainage of the pleural space, the patient with PPE would be likely to have any or all of the following: prolonged hospitalization, prolonged evidence of systemic toxicity, increased morbidity from any drainage procedure, increased risk for residual ventilatory impairment, increased risk for local spread of the inflammatory reaction, and increased mortality. Three variables, pleural space anatomy, pleural fluid bacteriology, and pleural fluid chemistry, were used in this annotated table to categorize patients into four separate risk levels for poor outcome: categories 1 (very low risk), 2 (low risk), 3 (moderate risk), and 4 (high risk). The panel's consensus opinion supported drainage for patients with moderate (category 3) or high (category 4) risk for a poor outcome, but not for patients with very low (category 1) or low (category 2) risk for a poor outcome. The medical literature was reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of medical and surgical management approaches for patients with PPE at moderate or high risk for poor outcome. The panel grouped PPE management approaches into six categories: no drainage performed, therapeutic thoracentesis, tube thoracostomy, fibrinolytics, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and surgery (including thoracotoiny with or without decortication and rib resection). The fibrinolytic approach required tube thoracostomy for administration of drug, and VATS included post-procedure tube thoracostomy. Surgery may have included concomitant lung resection and always included postoperative tube thoracostomy. All management approaches included appropriate treatment of the underlying pneumonia, including systemic antibiotics. Criteria for including articles in the panel review were adequate data provided for >/=20 adult patients with PPE to allow evaluation of at least one relevant outcome (death or need for a second intervention to manage the PPE); reasonable assurance provided that drainage was clinically appropriate (patients receiving drainage were either category 3 or category 4) and drainage procedure was adequately described; and original data were presented. The strength of panel recommendations on management of PPE was based on the following approach: level A, randomized, controlled trials with consistent results or individual randomized, controlled trial with narrow confidence interval (CI); level B, controlled cohort and case control series; level C, historically controlled series and case series; and level D, expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal or based on physiology, bench research, or "first principles." EVIDENCE: The literature review revealed 24 articles eligible for full review by the panel, 19 of which dealt with the primary management approach to PPE and 5 with a rescue approach after a previous approach had failed. Of the 19 involving the primary management approach to PPE, there were 3 randomized, controlled trials, 2 historically controlled series, and 14 case series. The number of patients included in the randomized controlled trials was small; methodologic weaknesses were found in the 19 articles describing the results of primary management approaches to PPE. The proportion and 95% CI of patients suffering each of the two relevant outcomes (death and need for a second intervention to manage the PPE) were calculated for the pooled data for each management approach from the 19 articles on the primary management approach. (ABST     

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® acute chest pain--suspected pulmonary embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a common and important clinical condition that cannot be accurately diagnosed on the basis of signs, symptoms, and history alone. In the absence of high pretest probability and with a negative high-sensitivity D-dimer test, PE can be effectively excluded; in other situations, diagnostic imaging is necessary. The diagnosis of PE has been facilitated by technical advancements and multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography, which is the major diagnostic modality currently used. Ventilation and perfusion (V/Q) scans remain largely accurate and useful in certain settings. Lower-extremity ultrasound can substitute by demonstrating deep vein thrombosis; however, if negative, further studies to exclude PE are indicated. In all cases, correlation with the clinical status, particularly with risk factors, improves not only the accuracy of diagnostic imaging but also overall utilization. Other diagnostic tests have limited roles. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The development and review of the guidelines include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.     

A bibliometric and visualized analysis of liver fibrosis from 2002 to 2022

Fibrosis of the liver is a degenerative alteration that occurs in the majority of chronic liver disorders. Further progression can lead to cirrhosis, liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma, which can seriously affect the health and lives of patients. The field of liver fibrosis research has flourished in the last 20 years, with approximately 9000 articles retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database alone. In order to identify future research hotspots and potential paths in a thorough and scientifically reliable manner, it is important to organize and visualize the research on this topic from a holistic and very general perspective. This study used bibliometric analysis with CiteSpace and VOSviewer software to provide a quantitative analysis, hotspot mining, and commentary of articles published in the field of liver fibrosis over the last 20 years. This bibliometric analysis contains a total of 8994 articles with 45667 authors from 6872 institutions in 97 countries, published in 1371 journals and citing 156 309 references. The literature volume has steadily increased over the last 20 years. Research has focused on gastroenterology and hepatology, pharmacology and pharmacy, and medicine, research, and experimental areas. We found that the pathological mechanisms, diagnostic and quantitative methods, etiology, and antifibrotic strategies constitute the knowledge structure of liver fibrosis. Finding mechanisms for liver fibrosis regression, identifying precise noninvasive diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, and creating efficient liver fibrosis patient treatments are the main goals of current research.     

Practice guidelines, a new reality in medicine. II. Methods of developing guidelines.

Current methods for developing practice guidelines include informal consensus development, formal consensus development, evidence-based guideline development, and explicit guideline development. Informal consensus development is the oldest and most common approach, but guidelines produced in this manner are often of poor quality and lack adequate documentation of methods. Formal consensus development uses a systematic approach to assess expert opinion and to reach agreement on recommendations. Evidence-based guideline development links recommendations directly to scientific evidence of effectiveness; rules of evidence are emphasized over expert opinion in making recommendations. Explicit guideline development clarifies the rationale by specifying the potential benefits, harms, and costs of available interventions; estimating the possibility of the outcomes; and comparing the desirability of the outcomes based on patient preferences. Steps in the development of practice guidelines include introductory decisions (selection of topic and panel members, clarification of purpose); assessments of clinical appropriateness (review of scientific evidence and expert opinion); assessment of public policy issues (resource limitations, feasibility issues); and guideline document development and evaluation (drafting of document, peer review, and pretesting).     

The application of telemedicine to geriatric medicine

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has the potential to improve access to the specialty of geriatric medicine, particularly in rural and remote settings. While telemedicine is widely used in some specialities, this is not yet the case in geriatric medicine. OBJECTIVE: To review the current literature to identify proven and potential strategies for application of telemedicine in geriatric medical practice. METHOD: A comprehensive review of literature pertaining to the application of telemedicine in geriatric medicine and relevant related sub-specialties was undertaken. RESULTS: A large number of small studies of limited quality, and a small number of robust studies including randomised trials, were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to suggest that a variety of telemedicine techniques can be applied effectively and safely in geriatric medicine across a variety of clinical settings. Patient satisfaction is generally reported as high. However, caution is advised due to the paucity of robust studies in the literature.     

Management of early hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the Delphi consensus process of the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association

BackgroundThere are many potential treatment options for patients with early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and practice patterns vary widely. This project aimed to use a Delphi conference to generate consensus regarding the management of small resectable HCC.MethodsA base case was established with review by members of AHPBA Research Committee. The Delphi panel of experts reviewed the literature and scored clinical case statements to identify areas of agreement and disagreement. Following initial scoring, discussion was undertaken, questions were amended, and scoring was repeated. This cycle was repeated until no further likelihood of reaching consensus existed.ResultsThe panel achieved agreement or disagreement consensus regarding 27 statements. The overarching themes included that resection, ablation, transplantation, or any locoregional therapy as a bridge to transplant were all appropriate modalities for early or recurrent HCC. For larger lesions, consensus was reached that radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation were not appropriate treatments.ConclusionUsing a validated system for identifying consensus, an expert panel agreed that multiple treatment modalities are appropriate for early stage HCC. These consensus guidelines are intended to help guide physicians through treatment modalities for early HCC; however, clinical decisions should continue to be made on a patient-specific basis.     

Combined evidence-based literature analysis and consensus guidelines for stocking of emergency antidotes in the United States

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To develop guidelines for the stocking of antidotes at hospitals that accept emergency admissions using combined evidence-based and consensus methods. METHODS: Study participants were 12 medical care providers from disciplines that are affected by insufficient stocking of emergency antidotes (clinical pharmacology, critical care, clinical pharmacy, emergency medicine, hospital pharmacy, internal medicine, managed care pharmacy, clinical toxicology, pediatrics, poison control centers, pulmonary medicine, regulatory medicine). Selection of individuals for the study panel was based on evidence of previous antidote research or perspective regarding the purchase and use of antidotes. The literature regarding each antidote was systematically amassed using pre-1966 literature files, current MEDLINE searches, the reference lists of major medical textbooks, and citations solicited from the consensus panel. Articles relevant to 4 defined core questions were included. These articles formed the basis of an evidence-based analysis performed by the principal investigator. After literature analysis, a literature summary and proposed guidelines for antidote stocking were submitted to the panel. Consensus was formed by electronic iterative presentation of alternatives to each panel member using a modified Delphi method. All panel members participated in 5 rounds of guideline analysis of 20 antidotes. RESULTS: Of the 20 antidotes, 16 antidotes were ultimately recommended for stocking (N -acetylcysteine, atropine, Crotalid snake antivenin, calcium gluconate and chloride, cyanide antidote kit, deferoxamine, digoxin immune Fab, dimercaprol, ethanol, fomepizole, glucagon, methylene blue, naloxone, pralidoxime, physostigmine, sodium bicarbonate), 2 were not recommended for stocking (black widow antivenin, ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid), and consensus could not be reached for 2 antidotes (flumazenil, physostigmine). CONCLUSION: These guidelines provide a tool to be used in revising or creating policies and procedures with regard to the stocking of antidotes in hospitals that accept emergency patients.     

A systematic review of surgical therapy for gastroparesis

Gastroparesis is characterized by delayed gastric emptying in the absence of obstruction. Common symptoms include nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Severe gastroparesis might result in recurrent hospitalizations, malnutrition, and significant mortality. Patients failing medical therapy are often considered for a variety of surgical interventions, the efficacy of which is not well studied. This review summarizes available literature on surgical interventions in gastroparesis. A MEDLINE search for the period from 1966 to 2002 was performed to identify all English language literature regarding surgical interventions in gastroparesis. Therapies reviewed were gastrostomy, jejunostomy, gastric pacing/stimulation, and gastrectomy or surgical drainage procedures. Candidate studies involved human subjects and included surgical series or trials. The search was conducted independently by two authors and discrepancies resolved by consensus opinion. Seventeen articles met inclusion criteria. These included series reporting on gastrostomy (2), jejunostomy (3), gastric stimulation (2), and gastrectomy for postsurgical (6), diabetic (3), and idiopathic (1) gastroparesis. All trials were unblinded, uncontrolled case series or retrospective reviews. Methodologic differences did not allow for pooled analysis. Completion gastrectomy seems to provide symptom relief in postsurgical gastroparesis. Benefits of gastric surgery for other forms of gastroparesis are not adequately studied. Gastrostomy might provide symptom improvement, but only 26 subjects in two trials were evaluable. Jejunostomy improved symptoms and nutrition in 32 evaluable subjects in three trials but had significant complications. Gastric neurostimulation improves symptoms of nausea and vomiting, but therapeutic gain beyond placebo has not been demonstrated. Limited data exist concerning surgical therapies of gastroparesis. Completion gastrectomy seems effective for postsurgical gastroparesis, but a cautious approach is warranted before surgical therapies in diabetic or idiopathic gastroparesis are used.     

Establishing a critical pathway for Korean medical management of lumbar disc herniation: A modified Delphi consensus process

A modified Delphi method was used to establish a consensus. Stakeholders and experts were invited to participate in the expert panel. Best practice statements and decision-making questionnaires were distributed to the panel. Panel members were asked to mark “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree” after a series of statements over several rounds until either a consensus was reached or the decision-making method was deemed unsuitable for reaching a consensus.The most common cause of lumbar pain is intervertebral degeneration, which leads to degenerative disc disease and lumbar disc herniation. There is a lack of unanimity regarding appropriate patient protocols and rehabilitation expectations for Korean medical care. The long-term viability of Korean medical treatment, further adoption in the institutional setting, and specific patient outcomes are contingent on the existence of appropriate Korean medical programs.A Korean medical expert panel of 17 practitioners employed a modified Delphi method to achieve consensus on Korean medical care for lumbar disc herniation. The panel first reviewed the literature and guidelines relevant to Korean medical treatment for lumbar disc herniation. The panel members considered questionnaires intended to determine “standardized” Korean medical care recommendations for patients with a wide range of symptoms of lumbar disc herniation. Each panel member participated in a round of voting, which was followed by an opinion-collecting session online. Consensus was defined as a ≥75% agreement among the respondents.In the first round, 144 questionnaires across 5 domains were administered to the expert panels. After reviewing the responses and open-ended comments collected in the first round, the authors modified the questionnaires to 53 items and proceeded. In round 2, consensus was achieved in all 53 survey questions. The final treatment pathway comprised a standardized and comprehensive care approach for lumbar disc herniations in 4 types of medical institutions.This study identified a core set of evidence- and consensus-based principles that are essential to a comprehensive model of care, incorporating identification, referral, and management of patients with lumbar disc herniation.     

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a progress report on diagnosis and a systematic review of treatment

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot appointed an expert panel to provide evidence-based guidance on the management of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Initially, the panel formulated a consensus scheme for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) for research purposes, and undertook a systematic review of the evidence relating to treatment. The consensus diagnostic scheme was based on expert opinion; the systematic review was based on a search for reports of the effectiveness of treatment for DFO published prior to December 2006. The panel reached consensus on a proposed scheme that assesses the probability of DFO, based on clinical findings and the results of imaging and laboratory investigations. The literature review identified 1168 papers, 19 of which fulfilled criteria for detailed data extraction. No significant differences in outcome were associated with any particular treatment strategy. There was no evidence that surgical debridement of the infected bone is routinely necessary. Culture and sensitivity of isolates from bone biopsy may assist in selecting properly targeted antibiotic regimens, but empirical regimens should include agents active against staphylococci, administered either intravenously or orally (with a highly bioavailable agent). There are no data to support the superiority of any particular route of delivery of systemic antibiotics or to inform the optimal duration of antibiotic therapy. No available evidence supports the use of any adjunctive therapies, such as hyperbaric oxygen, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor or larvae. We have proposed a scheme for diagnosing DFO for research purposes. Data to inform treatment choices in DFO are limited, and further research is urgently needed.     

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2022

It can be difficult for clinicians to stay updated on practice-changing articles.  Synthesis of relevant articles and guideline updates can facilitate staying informed on important new data impacting clinical practice.  The titles and abstracts from the 7 general internal medicine outpatient journals with highest impact factors and relevance were reviewed by 8 internal medicine physicians. Coronavirus disease 2019 research was excluded.  The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, the Journal of the American Medical Association, The British Medical Journal (BMJ), the Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA Internal Medicine, and Public Library of Science Medicine were reviewed. Additionally, article synopsis collections and databases were reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus based on clinical relevance to outpatient internal medicine, potential impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Article qualities and importance were debated until consensus was reached. Clusters of articles pertinent to the same topic were considered together. In total, 5 practice-changing articles were included, along with a highlight of key guideline updates.     

Evidence- and consensus-based practice guidelines for the diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) presents a significant diagnostic and management challenge for primary care practitioners. Improving the accuracy and timeliness of diagnosis may result in improved quality and efficiency of care. OBJECTIVE: To systematically appraise the existing diagnostic criteria and combine the evidence with expert opinion to derive evidence- and consensus-based guidelines for a diagnostic approach to patients with suspected IBS. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review (January 1966-April 2000) of computerized bibliographic databases. Articles meeting explicit inclusion criteria for diagnostic studies in IBS were subjected to critical appraisal, which formed the basis of guideline statements presented to an expert panel. To develop a diagnostic algorithm, an expert panel of specialists and primary care physicians was used to fill in gaps in the literature. Consensus was developed using a modified Delphi technique. RESULTS: The systematic literature review identified only 13 published studies regarding the effectiveness of competing diagnostic approaches for IBS, the accuracy of diagnostic tests, and the internal validity of current diagnostic symptom criteria. Few studies met accepted methodological criteria. While symptom criteria have been validated, the utility of endoscopic and other diagnostic interventions remains unknown. An analysis of the literature, combined with consensus from experienced clinicians, resulted in the development of a diagnostic algorithm relevant to primary care that emphasizes a symptom-based diagnostic approach, refers patients with alarm symptoms to subspecialists, and reserves radiographic, endoscopic, and other tests for referral cases. The resulting algorithm highlights the reliance on symptom criteria and comprises a primary module, 3 submodules based on the predominant symptom pattern (constipation, diarrhea, and pain) and severity level, and a subspecialist referral module. CONCLUSIONS: The dearth of available evidence highlights the need for more rigorous scientific validation to identify the most accurate methods of diagnosing IBS. Until such time, the diagnostic algorithm presented herein could inform decision making for a range of providers caring for primary care patients with abdominal discomfort or pain and altered bowel function suggestive of IBS.