Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “recommendations”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

IGIV in neurology--evidence and recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence for neurologic uses of immunoglobulin, intravenous (IGIV) in light of present-day clinical usage. This summary guided the development of practice recommendations for the effective and efficient use of IGIV in Neurology. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched to identify pertinent English-language review articles and original reports (n = 231) on the use of IGIV in neurology (excluding editorials, letters, and comments) published before March 1998. Evidence on alternative therapies was only included as compared to IGIV. The relevant original reports and review articles and older classic studies (n = 92) were synthesized into an information foundation. Extracted data included laboratory and clinical findings, objective measures, and clinical impressions. Clinical recommendations were based on evidence quality, graded by study design, clinical experiences of IGIV in Neurology Advisory Board members, and the conditions of IGIV use in therapy. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In neurology, many disorders are poorly understood, and the mechanisms behind beneficial regimens even less so. As a result, it is fairly common for best-practice decisions to rest on weaker evidence. The usefulness of IGIV in neurology can be described by a "combined score" based on evidence quality and strength of impact. Combined scores ranged from A+ (strongly recommended) to C (recommended as a last resort). The following clinical recommendations are made: IGIV is: strongly recommended for the treatment of Guillain-Barré syndrome (A+); favorably recommended for the treatment of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy, dermatomyositis, and multifocal motor neuropathy (A); recommended as a second resort for the treatment of multiple sclerosis and myasthenia gravis (B); and recommended as a last resort for the treatment of polymyositis, inclusion-body myositis, intractable epilepsies, and stiff-man syndrome (C).

Aged↗
PubMed2001

[Standards, Options and Recommendations for home parenteral or enteral nutrition in adult cancer patients].

CONTEXT: The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the Federation of the French Cancer Centres (FNCLCC), the 20 French Cancer Centres and specialists from French Public Universities, General Hospitals and Private Clinics. The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and outcome for cancer patients. The methodology is based on literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To develop clinical practice guidelines according to the definitions of the Standards, Options and Recommendations project for home parenteral or enteral nutrition in adult cancer patients. METHODS: Data were identified by searching Medline, Cancerlit, web sites and using the personal reference lists of members of the expert groups. Once the guidelines were defined, the document was submitted for review to 72 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The main recommendations for home parenteral or enteral nutrition in adult cancer patients are: 1) Home parenteral or enteral nutrition concerns cancer patients with malnutrition or with inadequate/impossible oral intake, during therapy of because of therapeutic after-effects (standard). Same indications apply for home and hospital artificial nutrition (standard). 2) Patients need a multidisciplinary follow-up (oncologists, nutritionists, and pain specialists), and this follow-up will make treatment adaptations according to the nutritional status possible (recommendation, expert agreement). An active participation of patients and/or their family circle is very important (standard). 3) The benefit of home parenteral or enteral nutrition on the quality of life of terminally ill patients (vs. hydration) has not been demonstrated. When life expectancy is below 3 months, and the Karnofsky index below 50, the drawbacks of home artificial nutrition are more important than its advantages. In this case, home parenteral or enteral nutrition is not recommended (recommendation, expert agreement). 4) Prospective clinical trials are recommended to evaluate the impact of home nutrition on quality of life in cancer patients (expert agreement). 5) The use of educational booklets that mention the telephone number of a referent health care and what to do when a problem happens (e.g. fever on home parenteral nutrition) is recommended (expert agreement). In France, patients should be referred to authorized home parenteral nutrition centres (recommendation, expert agreement).

Enteral Nutrition↗
PubMed2001

[Prophylactic prescription of low-molecular-weight heparin in the non-surgical setting: impact of recommendations].

OBJECTIVE: Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) had official approval for use for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis only for surgery patients when this survey was conducted, but were nevertheless often used in non-surgery patients. We conducted this "before and after" survey from May 1998 to April 1999 to assess the impact of the recommendations implemented in the beginning of 1999. METHODS: Data on the use of LMWH were collected on three different days within a three week interval in all non-surgery departments at the Tenon hospital before distribution of expert recommendations early in 1999. Published in La Presse Médicale in January 2000, these recommendations issued from an external panel of 43 experts who were contacted to establish a consensus opinion using the Delphi method. Data were again collected on three different days after implementation of the recommendations. Implementation was based on a patient-specific prescription order form requested by the hospital pharmacy for delivery to the department. RESULTS: Data were collected for 121 prescriptions prior to the recommendations and for 158 after. Sex-ratio, mean age and percentage of LMWH prescriptions did not differ significantly between the two periods. There was a lower number of non-appropriate prescriptions after implementation of the recommendations from 54.5% to 35.4% (p = 0.01) with better conformity for recommendation A (high-risk patients) (36% versus 43%, NS) and for recommendation B (= 2 risk situations or = 1 risk situation and = 2 aggravating factors) (10% versus 22%, p = 0.01). Better conformity of LMWH prescriptions in oncology and radiotherapy departments partially explained this general improvement, but the difference remained significant when excluding these two departments (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: This study shows that physician compliance with recognized expert recommendations can improve their implementation. This procedure is now in general use in the Tenon hospital.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Impact of the recommendations made by Spanish Club for the Study of Helicobacter pylori on eradication indications.

AIM: A Spanish Consensus Conference had been arranged by the Spanish Club for the Study of Helicobacter pylori to encourage the use of eradication regimens in appropriate indications. The aim of our study was to assess whether the publication of these recommendations in November 1999 induced a change on the indications of eradication in the referring primary care district. METHOD: Patients who had undergone Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy indicated by a gastroenterologist and referred to perform the 13C-labelled marked urea breath test were evaluated. Indications of eradication therapy were analysed and divided in: a) use of Conference recommended procedures (duodenal or gastric ulcer, erosive duodenitis, gastric MALT lymphoma and after resection of gastric adenocarcinoma); and b) other procedures not included in the recommendations (the rest). Indications established during former and latter years of publication of the Club's recommendations were compared. RESULTS: A total of 659 established eradications in 1999 against 537 in 2000, were studied. Regarding established eradications in 1999, 418 out of 659 (63%) followed the recommendations made by the Spanish Club, while 241 (37%) did not. In 2000, the proportion of eradication therapy administered using the recommendations made by the Spanish Club was similar to previous year: 338 (63%) followed the recommendations, against 199 (37%) that did not (p = not significant). In both years, considering those indications not recommended, patients either with superficial chronic gastritis with or without dyspepsia or with gastrooesophageal reflux disease were the main disorders to indicate eradication therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations of the Spanish Helicobacter pylori Study Club have not triggered a significant change after their publication on the indications for Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy in the setting studied.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Adherence to the AICR cancer prevention recommendations and subsequent morbidity and mortality in the Iowa Women's Health Study cohort.

In 1997, the American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) published 14 recommendations related to diet for individuals to reduce cancer incidence on a global basis; smoking was also discouraged. We operationalized these into nine recommendations that are particularly relevant to western populations in a cohort of 29,564 women ages 55 to 69 years at baseline in 1986 who had no history of cancer or heart disease. The cohort was followed through 1998 for cancer incidence (n = 4,379), cancer mortality (n = 1,434), cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality (n = 1,124), and total mortality (n = 3,398). The median number (range) of recommendations followed was 4 (0-8), and 33% of the cohort had ever smoked. Women who followed no or one recommendation compared with six to nine recommendations were at an increased risk of cancer incidence [relative risk (RR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.58] and cancer mortality (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.11-1.85), but there was no association with CVD mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.78-1.43). We calculated the population attributable risk (PAR) to estimate the proportion of cancer incidence, cancer mortality, and CVD mortality that theoretically would have been avoidable if the entire cohort had never smoked, had followed six to nine recommendations, or had done both. The PARs for smoking were 11% (95% CI 10-13) for cancer incidence, 21% (95% CI 17-24) for cancer mortality, and 20% (95% CI 16-23) for CVD mortality. The PARs for not following six to nine recommendations were 22% (95% CI 12-30) for cancer incidence, 11% (95% CI -5 to 24) for cancer mortality, and 4% (95% CI -20 to 19) for CVD mortality. When smoking and the operationalized AICR recommendations were combined together, the PARs were 31% (95% CI 19-37) for cancer incidence, 30% (95% CI 15-40) for cancer mortality, and 22% (95% CI 4-36) for CVD mortality. These data suggest that the adherence to the AICR recommendations, independently and in conjunction with not smoking, is likely to have a substantial public health impact on reducing cancer incidence and, to a lesser degree, cancer mortality at the population level.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

The 2005 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 1- blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and assessment of adults with high blood pressure (BP). OPTIONS AND OUTCOMES: For persons in whom a high BP value is recorded, the assignment of a diagnosis of hypertension is dependent on the appropriate measurement of BP, the level of the BP elevation and the duration of follow-up. In addition, the presence of cardiovascular risk factors and target organ damage should be assessed to determine the urgency, intensity and type of treatment. For persons diagnosed as having hypertension, estimating overall risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes requires an assessment of other vascular risk factors and hypertensive target organ damage. EVIDENCE: MEDLINE searches were conducted from November 2003 to October 2004 to update the 2004 recommendations. Reference lists were scanned, experts were polled, and the personal files of the authors and subgroup members were used to identify other studies. Identified articles were reviewed and appraised using prespecified levels of evidence by content and methodological experts. As per previous years, only studies that had been published in the peer-reviewed literature were included; evidence from abstracts, conference presentations and unpublished personal communications was not included. RECOMMENDATIONS: This document contains recommendations for BP measurement, diagnosis of hypertension and assessment of cardiovascular risk for adults with high BP. These include the accurate measurement of BP, criteria for diagnosis of hypertension, and recommendations for follow-up, assessment of overall cardiovascular risk, routine and optional laboratory testing, assessment for renovascular and endocrine causes, home and ambulatory BP monitoring, and the role of echocardiography for those with hypertension. Key features of the 2005 recommendations include an expedited diagnostic algorithm for hypertension and an endorsement of the use of home/self and ambulatory BP assessment as validated techniques in establishing the diagnosis of hypertension. VALIDATION: All recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence and voted on by the 43 members of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence-Based Recommendations Task Force. All recommendations reported in the present paper received at least 95% consensus. These guidelines will continue to be updated annually.

Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory↗
PubMed2005

The 2005 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part II - therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the management of hypertension in adults. OPTIONS AND OUTCOMES: For lifestyle and pharmacological interventions, evidence from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews of trials was preferentially reviewed. While changes in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality were the primary outcomes of interest, for lifestyle interventions, blood pressure lowering was accepted as a primary outcome given the lack of long-term morbidity/mortality data in this field, and for certain comorbid conditions, other relevant outcomes, such as development of proteinuria or worsening of kidney function, were considered. EVIDENCE: MEDLINE searches were conducted from November 2003 to October 2004 to update the 2004 recommendations. Reference lists were scanned, experts were contacted, and the personal files of the subgroup members and authors were used to identify additional published studies. All relevant articles were reviewed and appraised independently, using prespecified levels of evidence, by content and methodology experts. As per previous years, only studies that had been published in the peer-reviewed literature were included; evidence from abstracts, conference presentations and unpublished personal communications was not included. RECOMMENDATIONS: Lifestyle modifications to prevent and/or treat hypertension include the following: perform 30 min to 60 min of aerobic exercise on four to seven days of the week; maintain a healthy body weight (body mass index of 18.5 kg/m2 to 24.9 kg/m2) and waist circumference (less than 102 cm for men and less than 88 cm for women); limit alcohol consumption to no more than 14 units per week in men or nine units per week in women; follow a reduced fat, low cholesterol diet with an adequate intake of potassium, magnesium and calcium; restrict salt intake; and consider stress management (in selected individuals). Treatment thresholds and targets should take into account each individual's global atherosclerotic risk, target organ damage and any comorbid conditions. Blood pressure should be lowered to 140/90 mmHg or less in all patients, and to 130/80 mmHg or less in those with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease. Most adults with hypertension require more than one agent to achieve target blood pressures. For adults without compelling indications for other agents, initial therapy should include thiazide diuretics. Other agents appropriate for first-line therapy for diastolic hypertension with or without systolic hypertension include beta-blockers (in those younger than 60 years), angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (except in black patients), long-acting calcium channel blockers and angiotensin receptor antagonists. Other agents appropriate for first-line therapy for isolated systolic hypertension include long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers and angiotensin receptor antagonists. Certain comorbid conditions provide compelling indications for first-line use of other agents: in patients with angina, recent myocardial infarction or heart failure, beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors are recommended as first-line therapy; in patients with diabetes mellitus, ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists (or thiazides in patients with diabetes mellitus without albuminuria) are appropriate first-line therapies; and in patients with nondiabetic chronic kidney disease, ACE inhibitors are recommended. All hypertensive patients should have their fasting lipids screened, and those with dyslipidemia should be treated using the thresholds, targets and agents recommended by the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Working Group on the management of dyslipidemia and the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Selected patients with hypertension, but without dyslipidemia, should also receive statin therapy and/or acetylsalicylic acid therapy. VALIDATION: All recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence and voted on by the 43 members of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence-Based Recommendations Task Force. All recommendations reported here achieved at least 95% consensus. These guidelines will continue to be updated annually.

Antihypertensive Agents↗
PubMed2003

Physician acceptance rate of pharmacist recommendations to reduce use of potentially inappropriate medications in the assisted living setting.

OBJECTIVE: To reduce the number of potentially inappropriate medication orders, based on the Beers' criteria, for an elderly population residing in assisted living facilities through consultant pharmacist medication review, interventions, and recommendations DESIGN: Prospective case series of consultant pharmacist recommendations. PATIENTS: Census of 456 residents of assisted living facilities who received a new or refill medication order during the preceding two months. INTERVENTIONS: Potentially inappropriate medications for the elderly were identified and recommendation letters faxed to the physician for consideration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic characteristics, prevalence data for medications ordered and considered potentially inappropriate based on the Beers' criteria, and physician acceptance and return rate of recommendations. RESULTS: The data demonstrated that 31.6% of the residents in this study were receiving one or more routine or p.r.n. medications orders considered potentially inappropriate based on the Beers' criteria. The majority (82.9%) of the residents were female, and the average age of the residents was 85.4 +/- 7.34 SD years (range, 66-102 years). A total of 205 routine and p.r.n. medication orders were identified as potentially inappropriate. Of these orders, 16.7% were discontinued and 2.5% were changed to lower dosage regimens. The overall return rate of all recommendations faxed to physicians was 88.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate medications, according to the Beers' criteria for use in the elderly, are ordered at a high rate for residents of assisted living facilities. Though not mandated in all states, screening of these orders by a consultant pharmacist, with recommendations for alternative pharmacotherapy of less risk, would be appropriate. Physicians do address the recommendations in the majority of cases, but the physician acceptance rate of those recommendations is much lower. Consultant pharmacists have the opportunity to educate physicians of the risks of using medications considered potentially inappropriate for geriatric patients. Further studies are needed to determine barriers to physician acceptance of these recommendations.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1994

Family physicians' disagreements with the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The 1989 recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) represent an emerging consensus about which clinical preventive services should be delivered. However, practicing physicians disagree with a number of the recommendations in the Task Force prevention guidelines, and the reasons for disagreement have not been widely explored. METHODS: A survey questionnaire assessing physician agreement or disagreement with the USPSTF recommendations was sent to all 1784 active members of the Ohio Academy of Family Physicians in October 1990. A factor analysis was performed on the items with which at least 5% of physicians disagreed. Associations of physician demographics and attitudes with the factor scores were then examined. RESULTS: At least 5% of the 898 responding physicians disagreed with 67 of 150 USPSTF recommendations. Physicians disagreed with the USPSTF recommendations in three ways: (1) they believed that screening for some cancers is appropriate, even though not recommended by the USPSTF; (2) they believed that screening for other diseases in some populations is appropriate, even though not recommended by the USPSTF; and (3) they disagreed with some USPSTF recommendations for screening that is considered time-consuming or intrusive. Further analyses showed that practice setting and experience with the USPSTF guidelines were predictive of all three disagreement factors. Physician age, race, residency training, and reasons for disagreement were associated with two of the three factors. CONCLUSIONS: Physician disagreement with the USPSTF recommendations was not random but clustered into three distinct factors. An opportunity exists to design educational interventions for targeted subgroups of physicians. The views of practicing physicians should be incorporated into future guidelines.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Comparison of restorative treatment recommendations based on patients and patient simulations.

Restorative treatment recommendations made by dentists examining patients were compared with recommendations made by dentists examining simulations of the same patients. Simulations consisted of unmounted casts, full-mouth radiographs, three still video images of each tooth, periodontal charting, and a written dental history. Each of 117 teeth in five patients was examined by at least three and as many as 13 dentists under simulation and live conditions, with no dentists examining the same patient under both conditions. About three-fourths of teeth receiving a recommendation for treatment from at least one dentist received such a recommendation from at least one dentist examining under each of the two examination conditions. For these teeth, about three-fourths of all dentists examining under each condition recommended treatment. For teeth receiving a recommendation for treatment under only one examination condition, smaller proportions of dentists recommended treatment. Overall, there was three times as much variation in treatment recommendations among dentists in an examination condition than between the "average" treatment recommended by dentists in the two examination conditions.

Computer Simulation↗
PubMed1993

Reactions of pediatricians to a new Centers for Disease Control recommendation for universal immunization of infants with hepatitis B vaccine.

Despite immunization programs targeting high-risk groups, the incidence of hepatitis B has risen 37% over the last decade with 300,000 new infections and 5000 related deaths now occurring annually in the United States. As a new strategy to control the spread of hepatitis B, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommended in November 1991 universal hepatitis B immunization of infants. Details were published in an addendum to Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. There was no other federal effort to disseminate this recommendation. On February 14, 1992, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a similar recommendation. The time between the CDC and AAP recommendations presented the opportunity to determine the singular effect on clinical practice of the CDC's dissemination effort. The purpose of this study was to assess (1) the effectiveness of the CDC in disseminating a new immunization recommendation, (2) the effect of the new recommendation on clinical practice, and (3) the degree to which noneconomic barriers may affect adoption of universal hepatitis B immunization. All 778 pediatricians in North Carolina were surveyed by mail 2 to 3 months after publication of the new CDC recommendation. Descriptive statistics, chi 2 analysis, and logistic regression were used to assess the relationship of variables hypothesized to predict physician awareness of and/or agreement with the new recommendation. The response rate was 78%. Although 82% of pediatricians who administer immunizations were aware of the new recommendation, only 32% believed it was warranted in their practices.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1998

[Recommendation for rehabilitation measures of elderly disabled patients by the medical service of hospital insurance in Berlin and Brandenburg].

According to the German Nursing Care insurance law (Pflegeversicherungsgesetz) experts of the Medical Advisory Board of the statutory sickness funds (Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung, MDK) must consider recommending rehabilitative measures for persons in need of nursing care. This study measures the proportion of proposed rehabilitative therapies (physiotherapy, ergotherapy, speech therapy) as well as clinical and non-clinical predictors for these recommendations. The study population of the cross-sectional study consisted of all persons aged 60 years and older in Berlin and Brandenburg for whom the MDK experts had diagnosed a need for nursing care (stages I to III) by means of home visits in the second half of 1995. Data on recommendations and potential predictors were taken from the expert records. Recommendation rates were 6.6% (physiotherapy), 0.7% (ergotherapy) and 0.8% (speech therapy) respectively, for Berlin and Brandenburg taken together. While clinical variables (impairments and disabilities) had a considerable impact on the recommendations, also non-clinical variations were noted. Physiotherapy recommendation rates differed 3-fold by region (Brandenburg: 10.3%; Berlin: 3.4%). Variations also existed for age (60-70 years: 10.7%; > 90 years: 2.5%) and the presence of a professional care institution (present: 8.6%; not present: 5.4%). The strongest effect had an already existing prescription of physiotherapy from the patient's physician (current physiotherapy: 23.5%, no current physiotherapy: 4.6%). Multiple logistic regression demonstrated that these variables had independent effects after accounting for their overlapping influences and clinical characteristics. Variations of physiotherapy recommendation rates were also found for profession of the MDK experts (physician: 5.9%; nurse: 9.2%; physician and nurse together: 7%), but the effects were only partially independent. The observed low rates of recommended physiotherapy, ergotherapy and speech therapy as well as the non-clinical variations question the appropriateness of current recommendation practices.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

A novel process for updating recommendations for managing hypertension: rationale and methods.

BACKGROUND: There are numerous hypertension consensus recommendations intended for practising physicians. However, recommendations in their current format have limited impact on improving hypertension control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of national societies, headed by the Canadian Hypertension Society, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Coalition for High Blood Pressure Prevention and Control, and Health Canada has developed strategies to maintain annually updated recommendations for hypertension management and to provide greater opportunities for their implementation into clinical practice. The process is overseen by a steering committee. Subcommittees have been formed for each of a list of topics seen as important to the control of hypertension. The subcommittees, with the aid of a central librarian, conduct annual literature reviews in accordance with Cochrane Collaboration strategies. Modified existing and new recommendations are forwarded to a group with expertise in clinical epidemiology. Grades of evidence are assigned to each recommendation. Revised recommendations based on the above process will be presented annually at the conjoint Canadian Hypertension Society/Canadian Cardiovascular Congress meeting. Under the leadership of the Cardiovascular Disease Division of the Laboratory Centre for Disease Control, Health Canada, a committee has been charged with the implementation process. CONCLUSIONS: The improvements of the current process over previous national hypertension recommendations are four-fold. First, the recommendations will be updated annually. Second, the methodology has been improved. Third, the grading system can be used in the evaluation of complex study designs. Finally, the implementation process is extended. The authors are optimistic that these changes will contribute to the improvement of hypertension control in the Canadian population.

Canada↗
PubMed2001

The 2000 Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part one--therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the therapy of hypertension in adults. OPTIONS: For patients with hypertension, there are a number of lifestyle manoeuvres and antihypertensive agents that may control blood pressure. Randomized trials evaluating first- line therapy with thiazides, beta-adrenergic antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, alpha-blockers, centrally acting agents or angiotensin II receptor antagonists were reviewed. OUTCOMES: The health outcomes considered were changes in blood pressure, cardiovascular morbidity, and cardiovascular and/or all-cause mortality rates. Economic outcomes were not considered due to insufficient evidence. EVIDENCE: Medline searches were conducted from the period of the last revision of the Canadian Recommendations for the Management of Hypertension (May 1998 to October 2000). Reference lists were scanned, experts were polled, and the personal files of the subgroup members and authors were used to identify other studies. All relevant articles were reviewed and appraised, using prespecified levels of evidence, by content experts and methodological experts. VALUES: A high value was placed on the avoidance of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Various lifestyle manoeuvres and antihypertensive agents reduce the blood pressure of patients with sustained hypertension. In certain settings, and for specific classes of drugs, blood pressure lowering has been associated with reduced cardiovascular morbidity and/or mortality. RECOMMENDATIONS: The present document contains detailed recommendations pertaining to all aspects of the therapy of patients with hypertension, including lifestyle modifications proven to lower blood pressure, treatment thresholds, target blood pressures, choice of agents in various settings and strategies to enhance adherence. Lower thresholds for blood pressure treatment are advocated for people with other cardiovascular risk factors or established hypertensive target organ damage. Implicit in the recommendations for therapy is the principle that treatment should be individualized for each patient and the choice of agent should be dictated by coexistent conditions. For the treatment of uncomplicated essential hypertension, thiazides, beta-adrenergic antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or calcium channel blockers may be appropriate, depending on individual circumstances. VALIDATION: All recommendations were graded according to strength of the evidence and voted on by the Canadian Hypertension Recommendations Working Group. Only those recommendations achieving high levels of consensus are reported here. These guidelines will be updated annually.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

The 2001 Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part one--Assessment for diagnosis, cardiovascular risk, causes and lifestyle modification.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the assessment of the diagnosis, cardiovascular risk, identifiable causes and lifestyle modifications for adults with high blood pressure. OPTIONS: For persons in whom a high blood pressure value is recorded, hypertension is diagnosed based on the appropriate measurement of blood pressure, the level of the blood pressure elevation and the duration of follow-up. In addition, the presence of concomitant vascular risk factors, target organ damage and established atherosclerotic diseases must be assessed to determine the urgency, intensity and type of treatment. For persons receiving a diagnosis of hypertension, defining the overall risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes requires an assessment of concomitant vascular risk factors, including laboratory testing, a search for target organ damage and an assessment for modifiable causes of hypertension. Home and ambulatory blood pressure assessment and echocardiography are options for selected patients. OUTCOMES: The outcomes were: the identification of persons at increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes; the quantification of overall cardiovascular risk; and the identification of persons with potentially modifiable causes of hypertension. EVIDENCE: Medline searches were conducted from one year before the period of the last revision of the Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension (May 1999 to May 2001). Reference lists were scanned, experts were polled, and the personal files of the subgroup members and authors were used to identify other studies. Identified articles were reviewed and appraised, using prespecified levels of evidence, by content experts and methodological experts. In addition to an update of the previous year's review, new sections on assessing overall cardiovascular risk and endocrine causes are provided. VALUES: A high value was placed on the identification of persons at increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and of persons with identifiable causes of hypertension. BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: The identification of persons at higher risk of cardiovascular disease will permit counseling for lifestyle manoeuvres and introduction of antihypertensive drugs to reduce blood pressure for patients with sustained hypertension. The identification of specific causes of hypertension may permit the use of cause-specific interventions. In certain subgroups of patients, and for specific classes of drugs, blood pressure lowering has been associated with reduced cardiovascular morbidity or mortality. RECOMMENDATIONS: The present document contains recommendations for the assessment of the diagnosis, cardiovascular risk, identifiable causes and lifestyle modifications for adults with high blood pressure. These include the accurate measurement of blood pressure, criteria for the diagnosis of hypertension and recommendations for follow-up, assessment of overall cardiovascular risk, routine and optional laboratory testing, assessment for renovascular and endocrine causes, home and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, the role of echocardiography and lifestyle modifications. VALIDATION: All recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence and voted on by the Canadian Hypertension Recommendations Working Group. Only those recommendations achieving high levels of consensus are reported. These guidelines will be updated annually. ENDORSEMENT: These guidelines are endorsed by the Canadian Hypertension Society, The Canadian Coalition for High Blood Pressure Prevention and Control, The College of Family Physicians of Canada, The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, The Adult Disease Division and Bureau of Cardio-Respiratory Diseases and Diabetes at the Centre for Chronic Disease Prevention and Control, Health Canada.

Antihypertensive Agents↗
PubMed2004

The 2004 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part I--Blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the assessment of the diagnosis, cardiovascular risk and identifiable causes for adults with high blood pressure. OPTIONS: For persons in whom a high blood pressure value is recorded, the assignment of a diagnosis of hypertension is dependent on the appropriate measurement of blood pressure, the level of the blood pressure elevation and the duration of follow-up. In addition, the presence of concomitant vascular risk factors, target organ damage and established atherosclerotic diseases should be assessed to determine the urgency, intensity and type of treatment. For persons diagnosed as having hypertension, defining overall risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes requires an assessment of concomitant vascular risk factors, including laboratory testing, a search for target organ damage and an assessment for modifiable causes of hypertension. Home and ambulatory blood pressure assessment and echocardiography are options for selected patients. OUTCOMES: The identification of persons at increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes; the quantification of overall cardiovascular risk; and the identification of persons with potentially modifiable causes of hypertension. EVIDENCE: Medline searches were conducted from November 2001, one year before the period of the last revision of the Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension, to October 2003. Reference lists were scanned, experts were polled, and the personal files of subgroup members and authors were used to identify other studies. Identified articles were reviewed and appraised using prespecified levels of evidence by content experts and methodological experts. VALUES: A high value was placed on the identification of persons at increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and persons with identifiable and potentially modifiable causes of hypertension. BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: The identification of persons at higher risk of cardiovascular disease will permit counselling for lifestyle maneuvers and introduction of antihypertensive drugs to reduce blood pressure for patients with sustained hypertension. The identification of specific causes of hypertension may permit the use of cause-specific interventions. For certain subgroups of patients and specific classes of drugs, blood pressure lowering has been associated with reduced cardiovascular morbidity and/or mortality. RECOMMENDATIONS: The document contains recommendations for blood pressure measurement, diagnosis of hypertension and assessment of cardiovascular risk for adults with high blood pressure. These include the accurate measurement of blood pressure, criteria for diagnosis of hypertension, and recommendations for follow-up, assessment of overall cardiovascular risk, routine and optional laboratory testing, assessment for renovascular and endocrine causes, home and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, and the role of echocardiography for those with hypertension. VALIDATION: All recommendations were graded according to strength of evidence and voted on by the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence-Based Recommendations Task Force. Only the recommendations that achieved high levels of consensus are reported. These guidelines will be updated annually.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Reactions of pediatricians to the recommendation for universal varicella vaccination.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of self-reported adherence by pediatricians to the 1995 American Academy of Pediatrics and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices varicella immunization recommendations and to evaluate factors that might influence adherence. DESIGN: Mail survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Washington State pediatricians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Logistic regression was used to identify demographic characteristics, attitudes about varicella vaccine, and previous experiences with the disease that were associated with self-reported adherence to universal varicella immunization recommendations. RESULTS: Completed surveys were returned by 76% of contacted pediatricians, of whom 42% reported following a policy of universal varicella immunization. In multivariate analysis, agreement with statements regarding the effectiveness of varicella vaccine in reducing rare but serious complications of the disease (odds ratio [OR], 4.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.30-10.50) and in decreasing work loss by parents (OR, 4.21; 95% CI, 1.14-15.50) were associated with recommending universal immunization. Disagreement with statements concerning the lack of the need for varicella immunization because complications are rare (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.12-5.74), it is not required for school entry (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.37-4.64), and it is not medically cost-effective (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.21-4.18) were also associated with universally recommending the vaccine. In addition, experience with varicella encephalitis was also associated with adherence to the recommendations (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.06-3.65). Conversely, those who were concerned that varicella vaccine might not provide lifelong immunity were less likely to report recommending universal vaccination (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 50% of responding Washington State pediatricians reported recommending universal varicella vaccination. Adherence to the recommendations appears to be influenced by personal experience, perceptions about the potential seriousness of varicella, and beliefs about the societal and medical cost-effectiveness of varicella vaccine.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2005

Interventions for improving adherence to treatment recommendations in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests adherence to treatment recommendations is low. In type 2 diabetes, which is a chronic condition slowly leading to serious vascular, nephrologic, neurologic and ophthalmological complications, it can be assumed that enhancing adherence to treatment recommendations may lead to a reduction of complications. Treatment regimens in type 2 diabetes are complicated, encompassing life-style adaptations and medication intake. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for improving adherence to treatment recommendations in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies were obtained from searches of multiple electronic bibliographic databases supplemented with hand searches of references. Date of last search: November 2002. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled and controlled clinical trials, before-after studies and epidemiological studies, assessing changes in adherence to treatment recommendations, as defined in the objectives section, were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two teams of reviewers independently assessed the trials identified for inclusion. Three teams of two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The analysis for the narrative part was performed by one reviewer (EV), the meta-analysis by two reviewers (EV, JW). MAIN RESULTS: Twentyone studies assessing interventions aiming at improving adherence to treatment recommendations, not to diet or exercise recommendations, in people living with type 2 diabetes in primary care, outpatient settings, community and hospital settings, were included. Outcomes evaluated in these studies were heterogeneous, there was a variety of adherence measurement instruments. Nurse led interventions, home aids, diabetes education, pharmacy led interventions, adaptation of dosing and frequency of medication taking showed a small effect on a variety of outcomes including HbA1c. No data on mortality and morbidity, nor on quality of life could be found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current efforts to improve or to facilitate adherence of people with type 2 diabetes to treatment recommendations do not show significant effects nor harms. The question whether any intervention enhances adherence to treatment recommendations in type 2 diabetes effectively, thus still remains unanswered.

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2↗