Pharmacologic treatment of low bone density or osteoporosis to prevent fractures: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the available evidence on various pharmacologic treatments to prevent fractures in men and women with low bone density or osteoporosis. METHODS: Published literature on this topic was identified by using MEDLINE (1966 to December 2006), the ACP Journal Club database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (no date limits), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (no date limits), Web sites of the United Kingdom National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (no date limits), and the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Program (January 1998 to December 2006). Searches were limited to English-language publications and human studies. Keywords for search included terms for osteoporosis, osteopenia, low bone density, and the drugs listed in the key questions. This guideline grades the evidence and recommendations according to the ACP's clinical practice guidelines grading system. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP recommends that clinicians offer pharmacologic treatment to men and women who have known osteoporosis and to those who have experienced fragility fractures (Grade: strong recommendation; high-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: ACP recommends that clinicians consider pharmacologic treatment for men and women who are at risk for developing osteoporosis (Grade: weak recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP recommends that clinicians choose among pharmacologic treatment options for osteoporosis in men and women on the basis of an assessment of risk and benefits in individual patients (Grade: strong recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 4: ACP recommends further research to evaluate treatment of osteoporosis in men and women.     

Use of intensive insulin therapy for the management of glycemic control in hospitalized patients: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence for the link between the use of intensive insulin therapy to achieve different glycemic targets and health outcomes in hospitalized patients with or without diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Published literature on this topic was identified by using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Additional articles were obtained from systematic reviews and the reference lists of pertinent studies, reviews, and editorials, as well as by consulting experts; unpublished studies on ClinicalTrials.gov were also identified. The literature search included studies published from 1950 through March 2009. Searches were limited to English-language publications. The primary outcomes of interest were short-term mortality and hypoglycemia. This guideline grades the evidence and recommendations by using the ACP clinical practice guidelines grading system. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP recommends not using intensive insulin therapy to strictly control blood glucose in non-surgical intensive care unit (SICU)/medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients with or without diabetes mellitus (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: ACP recommends not using intensive insulin therapy to normalize blood glucose in SICU/MICU patients with or without diabetes mellitus (Grade: strong recommendation, high-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP recommends a target blood glucose level of 7.8 to 11.1 mmol/L (140 to 200 mg/dL) if insulin therapy is used in SICU/MICU patients (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).     

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized patients: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism for hospitalized nonsurgical patients (medical patients and patients with acute stroke). METHODS: This guideline is based on published literature on the topic from 1950 through April 2011 that was identified by using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and reference lists of pertinent randomized trials and systematic reviews to identify additional reports. Searches were limited to randomized trials and English-language publications. The primary outcome for this guideline was total mortality up to 120 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included symptomatic deep venous thrombosis; all pulmonary embolisms; fatal pulmonary embolism; all bleeding events; major bleeding events; and, for mechanical prophylaxis, effects on skin. This guideline grades the evidence and recommendations by using the ACP's clinical practice guidelines grading system. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP recommends assessment of the risk for thromboembolism and bleeding in medical (including stroke) patients prior to initiation of prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: ACP recommends pharmacologic prophylaxis with heparin or a related drug for venous thromboembolism in medical (including stroke) patients unless the assessed risk for bleeding outweighs the likely benefits (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP recommends against the use of mechanical prophylaxis with graduated compression stockings for prevention of venous thromboembolism (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). POLICY IMPLICATION: ACP does not support the application of performance measures in medical (including stroke) patients that promotes universal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis regardless of risk.     

Screening for osteoporosis in men: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians developed this guideline to present the available evidence on risk factors and screening tests for osteoporosis in men. METHODS: Published literature on this topic was identified by using MEDLINE (1990 to July 2007). Reference mining was done on the retrieved articles, references of previous reviews, and solicited articles from experts. The inclusion criteria for the studies were measuring risk factors for low bone mineral density or osteoporotic fracture in men or comparing 2 different methods of assessment for the presence of osteoporosis in men. This guideline grades the evidence and recommendations by using the American College of Physicians' clinical practice guidelines grading system. RECOMMENDATION 1: The American College of Physicians recommends that clinicians periodically perform individualized assessment of risk factors for osteoporosis in older men (Grade: strong recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: The American College of Physicians recommends that clinicians obtain dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for men who are at increased risk for osteoporosis and are candidates for drug therapy (Grade: strong recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: The American College of Physicians recommends further research to evaluate osteoporosis screening tests in men.     

Diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a clinical practice guideline update from the American College of Physicians, American College of Chest Physicians, American Thoracic Society, and European Respiratory Society

DESCRIPTION: This guideline is an official statement of the American College of Physicians (ACP), American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), American Thoracic Society (ATS), and European Respiratory Society (ERS). It represents an update of the 2007 ACP clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is intended for clinicians who manage patients with COPD. This guideline addresses the value of history and physical examination for predicting airflow obstruction; the value of spirometry for screening or diagnosis of COPD; and COPD management strategies, specifically evaluation of various inhaled therapies (anticholinergics, long-acting β-agonists, and corticosteroids), pulmonary rehabilitation programs, and supplemental oxygen therapy. METHODS: This guideline is based on a targeted literature update from March 2007 to December 2009 to evaluate the evidence and update the 2007 ACP clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of stable COPD. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that spirometry should be obtained to diagnose airflow obstruction in patients with respiratory symptoms (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Spirometry should not be used to screen for airflow obstruction in individuals without respiratory symptoms (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: For stable COPD patients with respiratory symptoms and FEV(1) between 60% and 80% predicted, ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS suggest that treatment with inhaled bronchodilators may be used (Grade: weak recommendation, low-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: For stable COPD patients with respiratory symptoms and FEV(1) <60% predicted, ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend treatment with inhaled bronchodilators (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 4: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that clinicians prescribe monotherapy using either long-acting inhaled anticholinergics or long-acting inhaled β-agonists for symptomatic patients with COPD and FEV(1) <60% predicted. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Clinicians should base the choice of specific monotherapy on patient preference, cost, and adverse effect profile. RECOMMENDATION 5: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS suggest that clinicians may administer combination inhaled therapies (long-acting inhaled anticholinergics, long-acting inhaled β-agonists, or inhaled corticosteroids) for symptomatic patients with stable COPD and FEV(1)<60% predicted (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 6: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that clinicians should prescribe pulmonary rehabilitation for symptomatic patients with an FEV(1) <50% predicted (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Clinicians may consider pulmonary rehabilitation for symptomatic or exercise-limited patients with an FEV(1) >50% predicted. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 7: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that clinicians should prescribe continuous oxygen therapy in patients with COPD who have severe resting hypoxemia (Pao(2) ≤55 mm Hg or Spo(2) ≤88%) (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).     

Current pharmacologic treatment of dementia: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians and American Academy of Family Physicians developed this guideline to present the available evidence on current pharmacologic treatment of dementia. METHODS: The targeted literature search included evidence related to the effectiveness of 5 U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacologic therapies for dementia for outcomes in the domains of cognition, global function, behavior/mood, and quality of life/activities of daily living. RECOMMENDATION 1: Clinicians should base the decision to initiate a trial of therapy with a cholinesterase inhibitor or memantine on individualized assessment. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 2: Clinicians should base the choice of pharmacologic agents on tolerability, adverse effect profile, ease of use, and cost of medication. The evidence is insufficient to compare the effectiveness of different pharmacologic agents for the treatment of dementia. (Grade: weak recommendation, low-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 3: There is an urgent need for further research on the clinical effectiveness of pharmacologic management of dementia.     

Lipid control in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

In an effort to provide internists and other primary care physicians with effective management strategies for diabetes care, the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee (CEAS) of the American College of Physicians (ACP) decided to develop guidelines on the management of dyslipidemia, particularly hypercholesterolemia, in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The CEAS commissioned a systematic review of the currently available evidence on the management of lipids in type 2 diabetes mellitus. The evidence review is presented in a background paper in this issue. On the basis of this systematic review, the CEAS developed recommendations that the ACP Board of Regents then approved as policy. The target audience for this guideline is all clinicians who care for patients with type 2 diabetes. The target patient population is all persons with type 2 diabetes, including those who already have some form of microvascular complication and, of particular importance, premenopausal women. The recommendations are as follows. RECOMMENDATION 1: Lipid-lowering therapy should be used for secondary prevention of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity for all patients (both men and women) with known coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes. RECOMMENDATION 2: Statins should be used for primary prevention against macrovascular complications in patients (both men and women) with type 2 diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors. RECOMMENDATION 3: Once lipid-lowering therapy is initiated, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus should be taking at least moderate doses of a statin. RECOMMENDATION 4: For those patients with type 2 diabetes who are taking statins, routine monitoring of liver function tests or muscle enzymes is not recommended except in specific circumstances.     

Red blood cell transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB*

DESCRIPTION: Although approximately 85 million units of red blood cells (RBCs) are transfused annually worldwide, transfusion practices vary widely. The AABB (formerly, the American Association of Blood Banks) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations about hemoglobin concentration thresholds and other clinical variables that trigger RBC transfusions in hemodynamically stable adults and children. METHODS: These guidelines are based on a systematic review of randomized clinical trials evaluating transfusion thresholds. We performed a literature search from 1950 to February 2011 with no language restrictions. We examined the proportion of patients who received any RBC transfusion and the number of RBC units transfused to describe the effect of restrictive transfusion strategies on RBC use. To determine the clinical consequences of restrictive transfusion strategies, we examined overall mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiac events, pulmonary edema, stroke, thromboembolism, renal failure, infection, hemorrhage, mental confusion, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay. RECOMMENDATION 1: The AABB recommends adhering to a restrictive transfusion strategy (7 to 8 g/dL) in hospitalized, stable patients (Grade: strong recommendation; high-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: The AABB suggests adhering to a restrictive strategy in hospitalized patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease and considering transfusion for patients with symptoms or a hemoglobin level of 8 g/dL or less (Grade: weak recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: The AABB cannot recommend for or against a liberal or restrictive transfusion threshold for hospitalized, hemodynamically stable patients with the acute coronary syndrome (Grade: uncertain recommendation; very low-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 4: The AABB suggests that transfusion decisions be influenced by symptoms as well as hemoglobin concentration (Grade: weak recommendation; low-quality evidence).     

Evidence-based interventions to improve the palliative care of pain, dyspnea, and depression at the end of life: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

RECOMMENDATION 1: In patients with serious illness at the end of life, clinicians should regularly assess patients for pain, dyspnea, and depression. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 2: In patients with serious illness at the end of life, clinicians should use therapies of proven effectiveness to manage pain. For patients with cancer, this includes nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and bisphosphonates. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 3: In patients with serious illness at the end of life, clinicians should use therapies of proven effectiveness to manage dyspnea, which include opioids in patients with unrelieved dyspnea and oxygen for short-term relief of hypoxemia. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 4: In patients with serious illness at the end of life, clinicians should use therapies of proven effectiveness to manage depression. For patients with cancer, this includes tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or psychosocial intervention. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 5: Clinicians should ensure that advance care planning, including completion of advance directives, occurs for all patients with serious illness. (Grade: strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.).     

Diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

RECOMMENDATION 1: In patients with respiratory symptoms, particularly dyspnea, spirometry should be performed to diagnose airflow obstruction. Spirometry should not be used to screen for airflow obstruction in asymptomatic individuals. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 2: Treatment for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be reserved for patients who have respiratory symptoms and FEV1 less than 60% predicted, as documented by spirometry. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 3: Clinicians should prescribe 1 of the following maintenance monotherapies for symptomatic patients with COPD and FEV1 less than 60% predicted: long-acting inhaled beta-agonists, long-acting inhaled anticholinergics, or inhaled corticosteroids. (Grade: strong recommendation, high-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 4: Clinicians may consider combination inhaled therapies for symptomatic patients with COPD and FEV1 less than 60% predicted. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 5: Clinicians should prescribe oxygen therapy in patients with COPD and resting hypoxemia (Pao2 < or =55 mm Hg). (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence.) RECOMMENDATION 6: Clinicians should consider prescribing pulmonary rehabilitation in symptomatic individuals with COPD who have an FEV1 less than 50% predicted. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence.).     

Evaluation of primary care patients with chronic stable angina: guidelines from the American College of Physicians

In 1999, the American College of Physicians (ACP), then the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine, and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) developed joint guidelines on the management of patients with chronic stable angina. The ACC/AHA then published an updated guideline in 2002, which the ACP recognized as a scientifically valid review of the evidence and background paper. This ACP guideline summarizes the recommendations of the 2002 ACC/AHA updated guideline and underscores the recommendations most likely to be important to physicians seeing patients in the primary care setting. This guideline is the first of 2 that will provide guidance on the management of patients with chronic stable angina. This document will cover diagnosis and risk stratification for symptomatic patients who have not had an acute myocardial infarction or revascularization procedure in the previous 6 months. Sections addressing asymptomatic patients are also included. Asymptomatic refers to patients with known or suspected coronary disease based on history or on electrocardiographic evidence of previous myocardial infarction, coronary angiography, or abnormal results on noninvasive tests. A future guideline will cover pharmacologic therapy and follow-up.     

Screening for colorectal cancer: a guidance statement from the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths for men and women in the United States. The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guidance statement for clinicians by assessing the current guidelines developed by other organizations on screening for colorectal cancer. When multiple guidelines are available on a topic or when existing guidelines conflict, ACP believes that it is more valuable to provide clinicians with a rigorous review of the available guidelines rather than develop a new guideline on the same topic. METHODS: The authors searched the National Guideline Clearinghouse to identify guidelines developed in the United States. Four guidelines met the inclusion criteria: a joint guideline developed by the American Cancer Society, the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology and individual guidelines developed by the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, and the American College of Radiology. GUIDANCE STATEMENT 1: ACP recommends that clinicians perform individualized assessment of risk for colorectal cancer in all adults. GUIDANCE STATEMENT 2: ACP recommends that clinicians screen for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults starting at the age of 50 years and in high-risk adults starting at the age of 40 years or 10 years younger than the age at which the youngest affected relative was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. GUIDANCE STATEMENT 3: ACP recommends using a stool-based test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or optical colonoscopy as a screening test in patients who are at average risk. ACP recommends using optical colonoscopy as a screening test in patients who are at high risk. Clinicians should select the test based on the benefits and harms of the screening test, availability of the screening test, and patient preferences. GUIDANCE STATEMENT 4: ACP recommends that clinicians stop screening for colorectal cancer in adults over the age of 75 years or in adults with a life expectancy of less than 10 years.     

Management of newly detected atrial fibrillation: a clinical practice guideline from the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians

The Joint Panel of the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians, in collaboration with the Johns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, systematically reviewed the available evidence on the management of newly detected atrial fibrillation and developed recommendations for adult patients with first-detected atrial fibrillation. The recommendations do not apply to patients with postoperative or post-myocardial infarction atrial fibrillation, patients with class IV heart failure, patients already taking antiarrhythmic drugs, or patients with valvular disease. The target physician audience is internists and family physicians dedicated to primary care. The recommendations are as follows: RECOMMENDATION 1: Rate control with chronic anticoagulation is the recommended strategy for the majority of patients with atrial fibrillation. Rhythm control has not been shown to be superior to rate control (with chronic anticoagulation) in reducing morbidity and mortality and may be inferior in some patient subgroups to rate control. Rhythm control is appropriate when based on other special considerations, such as patient symptoms, exercise tolerance, and patient preference. Grade: 2A. RECOMMENDATION 2: Patients with atrial fibrillation should receive chronic anticoagulation with adjusted-dose warfarin, unless they are at low risk of stroke or have a specific contraindication to the use of warfarin (thrombocytopenia, recent trauma or surgery, alcoholism). Grade: 1A. RECOMMENDATION 3: For patients with atrial fibrillation, the following drugs are recommended for their demonstrated efficacy in rate control during exercise and while at rest: atenolol, metoprolol, diltiazem, and verapamil (drugs listed alphabetically by class). Digoxin is only effective for rate control at rest and therefore should only be used as a second-line agent for rate control in atrial fibrillation. Grade: 1B. RECOMMENDATION 4: For those patients who elect to undergo acute cardioversion to achieve sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation, both direct-current cardioversion (Grade: 1C+) and pharmacological conversion (Grade: 2A) are appropriate options. RECOMMENDATION 5: Both transesophageal echocardiography with short-term prior anticoagulation followed by early acute cardioversion (in the absence of intracardiac thrombus) with postcardioversion anticoagulation versus delayed cardioversion with pre- and postanticoagulation are appropriate management strategies for those patients who elect to undergo cardioversion. Grade: 2A. RECOMMENDATION 6: Most patients converted to sinus rhythm from atrial fibrillation should not be placed on rhythm maintenance therapy since the risks outweigh the benefits. In a selected group of patients whose quality of life is compromised by atrial fibrillation, the recommended pharmacologic agents for rhythm maintenance are amiodarone, disopyramide, propafenone, and sotalol (drugs listed in alphabetical order). The choice of agent predominantly depends on specific risk of side effects based on patient characteristics. Grade: 2A.     

Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society

RECOMMENDATION 1: Clinicians should conduct a focused history and physical examination to help place patients with low back pain into 1 of 3 broad categories: nonspecific low back pain, back pain potentially associated with radiculopathy or spinal stenosis, or back pain potentially associated with another specific spinal cause. The history should include assessment of psychosocial risk factors, which predict risk for chronic disabling back pain (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: Clinicians should not routinely obtain imaging or other diagnostic tests in patients with nonspecific low back pain (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: Clinicians should perform diagnostic imaging and testing for patients with low back pain when severe or progressive neurologic deficits are present or when serious underlying conditions are suspected on the basis of history and physical examination (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 4: Clinicians should evaluate patients with persistent low back pain and signs or symptoms of radiculopathy or spinal stenosis with magnetic resonance imaging (preferred) or computed tomography only if they are potential candidates for surgery or epidural steroid injection (for suspected radiculopathy) (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 5: Clinicians should provide patients with evidence-based information on low back pain with regard to their expected course, advise patients to remain active, and provide information about effective self-care options (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 6: For patients with low back pain, clinicians should consider the use of medications with proven benefits in conjunction with back care information and self-care. Clinicians should assess severity of baseline pain and functional deficits, potential benefits, risks, and relative lack of long-term efficacy and safety data before initiating therapy (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). For most patients, first-line medication options are acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. RECOMMENDATION 7: For patients who do not improve with self-care options, clinicians should consider the addition of nonpharmacologic therapy with proven benefits-for acute low back pain, spinal manipulation; for chronic or subacute low back pain, intensive interdisciplinary rehabilitation, exercise therapy, acupuncture, massage therapy, spinal manipulation, yoga, cognitive-behavioral therapy, or progressive relaxation (weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).     

Primary care management of chronic stable angina and asymptomatic suspected or known coronary artery disease: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians

In 1999, the American College of Physicians (ACP), then the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine, and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) developed joint guidelines on the management of patients with chronic stable angina. The ACC/AHA then published an updated guideline in 2002, which ACP recognized as a scientifically valid review of the evidence and background paper. This ACP guideline summarizes the recommendations of the 2002 ACC/AHA updated guideline and underscores the recommendations most likely to be important to physicians seeing patients in the primary care setting. This guideline is the second of 2 that provide guidance on the management of patients with chronic stable angina. This document covers treatment and follow-up of symptomatic patients who have not had an acute myocardial infarction or revascularization procedure in the previous 6 months. Sections addressing asymptomatic patients are also included. Asymptomatic refers to patients with known or suspected coronary disease based on a history or electrocardiographic evidence of previous myocardial infarction, coronary angiography, or abnormal results on noninvasive tests. A previous guideline covered diagnosis and risk stratification for symptomatic patients who have not had an acute myocardial infarction or revascularization procedure in the previous 6 months and asymptomatic patients with known or suspected coronary disease based on a history or electrocardiographic evidence of previous myocardial infarction, coronary angiography, or abnormal results on noninvasive tests.     

Guideline chaos: conflicting recommendations for preoperative cardiac assessment

The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and the American College of Physicians (ACP) have disseminated guidelines to assess preoperative cardiac risks before noncardiac surgery. The objectives of this study were to determine if these guidelines differ in preoperative recommendations for a group of patients, and whether these recommendations differ from actual provider recommendations. In this retrospective cohort study, patient characteristics and physician recommendations were abstracted from electronic medical records of consecutive patients attending a Veteran Affairs medical preoperative evaluation clinic from January 1 to April 1, 1998. Patient characteristics were used to determine what preoperative cardiac testing should have been ordered if each guideline was followed. Possible recommendations included operation without testing (OWT), noninvasive stress testing (NST), cardiac catheterization (CC), or cancel or delay surgery (OTHER). Recommendations were compared using statistical tests for agreement. Of the 138 patients identified, most underwent moderate-risk surgeries. Recommendations for preoperative testing were discordant between guidelines for 17% of patients (kappa = 0.38). Guidelines never agreed on the need for NST. Extreme differences in recommendations (i.e., one recommends OWT, the other CC) occurred in 9 patients (7%). Physicians ordered NST more often (n = 27) than either guideline. In this subgroup of patients where providers ordered a NST, the 2 guidelines significantly differed (kappa = 0.26). When applied to real patients being evaluated for surgery, ACC/AHA and ACP guidelines significantly differed in recommendations for preoperative cardiac testing. Results have implications for implementation, management, and practitioner adherence to published guidelines.     

Orale Diabetestherapie

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes continues to show a clear upward trend in Germany. In earlier days it was considered the "harmless diabetes of old age," but has become increasingly recognized as a disease carrying a high risk of vascular sequelae as well as shortening the diabetic's remaining life expectancy if adequate therapy is not initiated. In addition to correcting hyperglycemia, treatment consists in effective management of concomitant risk factors such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, and adiposity resulting from faulty nutrition and lack of exercise. In the large majority of overweight type 2 diabetics, metformin is the oral antidiabetic agent of first choice provided the patient does not exhibit renal insufficiency, which represents the most important contraindication. This recommendation for monotherapy of overweight type 2 diabetics is supported by an endpoint study. In contrast, no equivalent evidence is available on any of the possible options for oral combination therapy.     

Evaluation of the metformin initiation rate in veterans with newly identified type 2 diabetes

BackgroundAn estimated 35 million individuals in the United States have diabetes. The American Diabetes Association recommends metformin as first-line pharmacologic treatment. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the metformin initiation rate in veterans with recently identified type 2 diabetes.MethodsVeterans with new onset type 2 diabetes were identified using National Veterans Health Administration Data. Retrospective information was obtained from those with a first A1C ≥ 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) between 2013 and 2018. Veterans with at least one additional A1C < 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) documented in the three years prior to the A1C diagnostic for diabetes were included in the analysis.ResultsA total of 144,180 veterans were included. Of those, 45,776 (31.7%) were started on metformin within one year of diabetes diagnosis. The median time to metformin initiation was 12 days and median time to initiation of any anti-hyperglycemic was 11 days. Approximately 16,000 veterans were referred for lifestyle interventions within 90 days.ConclusionMetformin initiation occurred in fewer patients than expected given metformin is a generic, well-tolerated medication recommended as first-line pharmacologic treatment option regardless of A1C. Further studies are needed to assess the barriers of initiating metformin at time of diabetes diagnosis.     

��������˯�ߺ�����ͣ�ۺ��������ٴ�ָ�ϡ�(2013)���

??Recently??the American College of Physicians (ACP) published the guideline on the management of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) in adults.It strongly recommends continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment as initial therapy for OSAS patients.All overweight and obese OSAS patients should be encouraged to lose weight.Use of mandibular advancement devices (MADs) is an alternative therapy to CPAP for OSAS patients who prefer MADs or for those with adverse effects associated with CPAP.Surgery should not be used as an initial treatment of OSAS.Pharmacologic therapy should not be prescribed for OSAS treatment.     

Role of metformin in the initiation of pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes: an Asian-Pacific perspective

Increases in the prevalence of type 2 diabetes of 30-60% will occur in many Asian-Pacific countries by 2025, driven by urbanisation, sedentary habits and energy-rich diets. Obesity, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome and diabetes are closely interrelated. Optimal control of diabetes and associated risk factors has reduced the risk of diabetes-related complications. In the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS), metformin reduced the risk of macrovascular complications and retrospective analyses have confirmed the efficacy of metformin in improving clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetic patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. This growing body of evidence has led to the recommendation of metformin as optimum initial pharmacotherapy in overweight type 2 diabetic patients. Obesity is less prevalent in the Asian-Pacific population than in Caucasian populations. Nevertheless, metformin has multiple beneficial metabolic effects, which provide sufficient rationale for it to be recommended as the initial oral anti-diabetic pharmacotherapy, alone or in combination, irrespective of body mass index. This recommendation is consistent with global guidelines and regional recommendations for the Asian-Pacific region from the International Diabetes Federation. These recommendations can serve as templates for development of local guidelines for Asian people with diabetes, given the ethnic and cultural diversity within the region.