Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Consensus Statements as Topic”

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 577 records · Page 32Linked to original sources
PubMed1998

Perioperative artificial nutrition in elective surgery: an impact study of French guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: In France, the consensus conference, held on 16 December 1994, produced guidelines on perioperative artificial nutrition (AN) use in patients undergoing elective surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these guidelines on practice patterns. METHODS: The study was a practice pattern study with a 'before-after' design and a control group in England. A retrospective cross-sectional sample of adult patients undergoing elective resection of the digestive tract was collected in France and England before and after the consensus conference. RESULTS: Malnourished patients received postoperative AN in 94% of 'before' cases and 82% 'after' but inadequate preoperative AN (40% 'before' and 26% 'after'). Postoperative AN appeared to be over-prescribed in non-malnourished patients without prolonged postoperative fasting (70% 'before' and 65% 'after'). In the English sample there was no significant variation in AN use between 'before' and 'after' periods. CONCLUSION: This study shows that clinical guidelines disseminated by consensus conference had a low impact on practice patterns in France and thus confirms the need to enforce the dissemination of the guidelines.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

The third molar controversy: framing the controversy as a public health policy issue.

PURPOSE: This article summarizes the current research available concerning the removal of impacted third molars, and provides a background from which practitioners, public health policy advocates, and third-party payers can more objectively assess the the issues of appropriateness of care and overutilization of third molar surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature review was undertaken, with emphasis on noninterventional outcome studies and studies using statistical modeling techniques. RESULTS: The health care resources being devoted to the removal of third molars are in the billions of dollars. There is an attempt at limiting these expenditures by third-party payers. These attempts have focused on the prophylactic removal of asymptomatic third molars. Some sources label the procedure as unnecessary surgery. Analysis of the literature does not answer this question with any degree of confidence. CONCLUSION: There appears to be a need for large population-based studies to provide practitioners with data to help them decide when intervention is indicated and when it is not. There is little agreement on how many third molars are being removed for so-called prophylactic reasons. The studies that are available on the nonintervention course are few and have significant flaws. The studies that argue against prophylactic removal are largely based on statistical models. The application of these models as a basis for clinical decision making is questionable. The effects of provider supply and reimbursement must be considered as an integral part of the controversy.

Consensus Statements as Topic↗
PubMed2001

The application of a Dutch consensus diagnostic strategy for pulmonary embolism in clinical practice.

In The Netherlands, the 'Dutch consensus strategy' was formulated in 1993 as a diagnostic strategy for patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Four years after its introduction, the application of this strategy was investigated. A questionnaire was sent to the hospital management and the departments of internal medicine and pulmonology of all Dutch hospitals. In total, 384 questionnaires were sent out. The response rates of the internists and pulmonologists were 63 and 65%, respectively. The specialists reported to have followed the consensus strategy in 75% of the patients seen the month prior to the questionnaire. However, analysis of only the last patient with the suspicion of pulmonary embolism revealed that the consensus strategy was followed in 55 of the 162 patients. As well, an overuse and an underuse of the different diagnostic facilities was documented. Furthermore almost a quarter of the patients were treated without an ascertained diagnosis, whereas 11% were not treated despite an improper exclusion of venous thrombo-embolism. Compared to a survey in 1994, the use of the 'Dutch consensus strategy' has not improved dramatically. In 34% of the patients, the consensus strategy was strictly followed (i.e. without any additional investigation); however in 67% of the patients a proper diagnosis was achieved. In any diagnostic strategy, two aspects should be considered. First the availability of the different facilities. Second the acceptance of the strategy by the physicians, involved in the diagnosis of patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2001

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest.

PURPOSE: To develop and disseminate a report aimed primarily at practicing radiation oncology physicians and medical physicists that describes the current state-of-the-art of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Those areas needing further research and development are identified by category and recommendations are given, which should also be of interest to IMRT equipment manufacturers and research funding agencies. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The National Cancer Institute formed a Collaborative Working Group of experts in IMRT to develop consensus guidelines and recommendations for implementation of IMRT and for further research through a critical analysis of the published data supplemented by clinical experience. A glossary of the words and phrases currently used in IMRT is given in the. Recommendations for new terminology are given where clarification is needed. RESULTS: IMRT, an advanced form of external beam irradiation, is a type of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). It represents one of the most important technical advances in RT since the advent of the medical linear accelerator. 3D-CRT/IMRT is not just an add-on to the current radiation oncology process; it represents a radical change in practice, particularly for the radiation oncologist. For example, 3D-CRT/IMRT requires the use of 3D treatment planning capabilities, such as defining target volumes and organs at risk in three dimensions by drawing contours on cross-sectional images (i.e., CT, MRI) on a slice-by-slice basis as opposed to drawing beam portals on a simulator radiograph. In addition, IMRT requires that the physician clearly and quantitatively define the treatment objectives. Currently, most IMRT approaches will increase the time and effort required by physicians, medical physicists, dosimetrists, and radiation therapists, because IMRT planning and delivery systems are not yet robust enough to provide totally automated solutions for all disease sites. Considerable research is needed to model the clinical outcomes to allow truly automated solutions. Current IMRT delivery systems are essentially first-generation systems, and no single method stands out as the ultimate technique. The instrumentation and methods used for IMRT quality assurance procedures and testing are not yet well established. In addition, many fundamental questions regarding IMRT are still unanswered. For example, the radiobiologic consequences of altered time-dose fractionation are not completely understood. Also, because there may be a much greater ability to trade off dose heterogeneity in the target vs. avoidance of normal critical structures with IMRT compared with traditional RT techniques, conventional radiation oncology planning principles are challenged. All in all, this new process of planning and treatment delivery has significant potential for improving the therapeutic ratio and reducing toxicity. Also, although inefficient currently, it is expected that IMRT, when fully developed, will improve the overall efficiency with which external beam RT can be planned and delivered, and thus will potentially lower costs. CONCLUSION: Recommendations in the areas pertinent to IMRT, including dose-calculation algorithms, acceptance testing, commissioning and quality assurance, facility planning and radiation safety, and target volume and dose specification, are presented. Several of the areas in which future research and development are needed are also indicated. These broad recommendations are intended to be both technical and advisory in nature, but the ultimate responsibility for clinical decisions pertaining to the implementation and use of IMRT rests with the radiation oncologist and radiation oncology physicist. This is an evolving field, and modifications of these recommendations are expected as new technology and data become available.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2003

Evaluation of the Houston biochemical relapse definition in men treated with prolonged neoadjuvant and adjuvant androgen ablation and assessment of follow-up lead-time bias.

PURPOSE: To validate the Houston prostate-specific antigen relapse definition in a mature cohort of men treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and adjuvant androgen ablation (AA) and men treated with EBRT monotherapy, and to compare these results with the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) and Vancouver prostate-specific antigen relapse (biochemical no evidence of disease) definitions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective database of 1490 men treated with EBRT, with or without AA, was examined. The impact on hazard proportions, as well as the predictive ability, of the Houston, ASTRO, and Vancouver definitions was tested. RESULTS: For all patients, the Houston definition was more accurate (79.5%) than the ASTRO (76.7%) or Vancouver (77.2%) definitions in predicting subsequent clinical relapse. The Houston definition was superior to the ASTRO definition in those treated both with and without AA and equivalent to the Vancouver definition in those receiving AA. The Houston definition demonstrated proportional hazards when categorized for the use of AA, unlike the ASTRO and Vancouver definitions. The effect of inadequate follow-up on the projected relapse rates was negligible with the Houston definition. CONCLUSION: The Houston relapse definition is favored after EBRT monotherapy or combined EBRT and AA. Use of the Cox proportional hazard multivariate analysis is appropriate with the Houston definition, but not with the ASTRO or Vancouver definitions if AA and non-AA patients are combined.

Androgen Antagonists↗
PubMed1996

Parameningeal rhabdomyosarcoma: results of an international workshop.

PURPOSE: A retrospective analysis was performed on children with nonmetastatic rhabdomyosarcomas (RMS) involving a parameningeal site treated by one of the four major cooperative groups: Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS), International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP), German Cooperative Group (CWS), and Italian Cooperative Group (ICS) to analyse survival and prognostic factors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1979 and 1989, 230 children (median age 6 years) were treated in the IRS III, SIOP 84, CWS 81, and ICS 79 studies. All patients received chemotherapy, and 203 were irradiated. Radiotherapy doses were similar in the four studies, although treatment volumes were not similar. The SIOP patients had smaller volumes treated. In addition, the SIOP patients with a low risk of meningeal involvement and children under 5 years of age were not irradiated if they had a complete response (CR) to chemotherapy. Time to initiation of irradiation was earlier in the IRS and Italian studies. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 62 months (range 22-140). The 5-year survival and 5-year event-free survival were better for the IRS study (74% and 71%) than for the other study groups (55% and 36% for SIOP, 47% and 47% for CWS, and 39% and 39% for ICS). The low-risk (LR) patients in the IRS study had improved survival. However, patients with high risk of meningeal involvement had similar survival in all four studies. The most significant prognostic factor was the size of tumor (> 5 cm). CONCLUSION: The improved results from the IRS group, especially among the LR patients, could be related to the IRS treatment employed, particularly the systematic use of radiation, to the inclusion of patients with smaller tumors, and to the routine use of quality control of radiation.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Treatment planning for primary breast cancer: a patterns of care study.

PURPOSE: The 1989 Patterns of Care Study included treatment planning for early breast cancer. A Consensus Committee of radiation physicists and oncologists determined current guidelines and developed questionnaires to determine treatment planning and delivery processes used by the participating institutions (e.g., use of portal films). This article presents and analyzes the results of that survey. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The survey included 449 respondents, distributed as follows: 136 (30%) from Strata I (academic facilities); 169 (38%) from Strata II (hospital based facilities); and 144 (32%) from Strata III (freestanding facilities). The treatment planning procedures surveyed included: whether individualized tissue compensators are used, whether inhomogeneity corrections are used in dose calculations, the use of computerized tomography, whether isodose distributions for external beam tangents and interstitial implants are generated, the use of lymphoscintigraphy, immobilization devices, simulations, portal films, etc. RESULTS: The survey results demonstrated that out of 305 patients from Strata I and II institutions, 237 (78%) had simulated tangential fields. Consistent with this finding is that 76% of patients from Strata I and II institutions were immobilized, while only 51% of Strata III patients were. Moreover, only 18 out of the 449 (4%) of cases did not have any type of external beam dose distribution calculated--presumably, in these cases missing tissue compensation would be unlikely. On the other hand, 41% of the Strata II, 27% of Strata III, but only 19% of Strata I (p < 0.0002) cases received CT. Surprisingly, 19% of the Strata I, 35% of the Strata II, and 25% of the Strata III (p = 0.0011) patients received lymphoscintigraphy, perhaps reflecting the use of wide tangents to encompass the internal mammary nodes in these patients. In terms of optimizing treatments, 74% of Strata I, 70% of Strata II, and 78% of Strata III patients had wedges used on both tangential fields, although in 5, 12, and 14%, respectively, no beam modification of any sort was used. Furthermore, it should be noted that in 7% of the Strata I, 23% of Strata II, and 37% of Strata III cases there was no attempt to reduce the divergence of the tangential fields into the lung. On the other hand, if one considers the 135 (of 449) patients where matching of the tangential and supraclavicular fields was applicable, 41% of Strata I, 22% of Strata II and 46% of Strata III patients had those fields matched in a vertical plane, which would involve sophisticated alignment procedures. Quality control of treatment delivery was high: 97% of all surveyed received portal films at least once. The use of thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD) to measure the dose to the contralateral breast was of little interest: only 4 of the 305 Strata I and II patients received in vivo measurements. CONCLUSIONS: This national survey has established the patterns of treatment planning for early breast cancer. It shows a generally consistent approach-although a number of statistically significant variations have been identified.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1998

Changes in biochemical disease-free survival rates as a result of adoption of the consensus conference definition in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with external-beam radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The optimal definition of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after definitive radiotherapy remains elusive. Different institutions have developed their own definitions, and a consensus conference (CC) sponsored by the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology has recently proposed another definition. This study compares the definition previously used at our institution with the definition proposed by the CC. METHODS: Two hundred and eight patients were treated for localized prostate cancer with conformal external-beam radiotherapy between 1989-1993 at our institution and followed for at least 24 months. Patients were categorized as failures according to our institutional definition and the CC definition. Our definition (CPMC) required two increases in serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) over at least a 3-month period with a final value of at least 1 ng/ml or a single value resulting in clinical intervention. The CC definition required three consecutive increases in PSA. This was modified to also consider those patients with one or two increases leading to clinical intervention as failures. Differences in the failure rates between the two definitions were evaluated and factors influencing these differences were explored. In an additional analysis, CC was modified such that patients with one or two PSA increases were censored at the time of the PSA prior to the increases (CC-II), rather than at the last PSA (CC). The median follow-up time was 31 months. RESULTS: There were 36 fewer failures according to CC (n = 96) compared with CPMC (n = 132) (p < 0.001). Twenty cases called failures by CPMC subsequently had a decrease in PSA ("false failures"). The other 16 patients have had two increases in PSA, but are awaiting their next follow-up visit to obtain a third PSA ("pending failures"). Analysis of factors predicting "pending failures" showed Gleason score to be the sole predictor of this change in status in multivariate analysis (p = 0.03) with patients with lower-grade tumors being more likely to change status (Gleason 2-6: 15% vs. Gleason 7-10: 1%). On the other hand, "false failures," compared to true failures, had a lower mean PSA nadir (1.7 ng/ml vs. 7.0 ng/ml, p < 0.001) and significantly smaller mean increases in PSA (1st increase: 0.6 ng/ml vs. 3.4 ng/ml, p = 0.006; 2nd increase: 0.4 ng/ml vs. 4.8 ng/ml, p = 0.002). In 85% (17 of 20) of these patients, at least one of the increases was < or = 0.3 ng/ml compared with 44% (42 of 96) of the true failures (p = 0.0008). CC-II resulted in a small decrease in BDFS rates compared with CC, but did not affect the overall difference between CC and CPMC. A modified definition that defines failure as two consecutive increases in PSA over 3 months, with a final value greater than 1.0 ng/ml and each increase being at least 0.3 ng/ml, or three consecutive increases would result in a "false" failure rate of only 3% (3 of 99) and identify 56% (54 of 96) of the true failures after only two PSA increases. CONCLUSION: The CPMC definition of two PSA increases can falsely identify patients as failures, particularly if the increases in PSA are small (i.e., < or = 0.3 ng/ml). The CC definition requiring three increases in PSA can falsely identify patients as disease-free when the time to failure is long relative to the follow-up time. We propose a that a definition that combines aspects of both definitions (two consecutive increases in PSA over 3 months, with a final value greater than 1.0 ng/ml and each increase being at least 0.3 ng/ml, or three consecutive increases) may be a better definition of biochemical failure.

Consensus Statements as Topic↗