Harmonization of clinical practice guidelines for primary prevention and screening: actionable recommendations and resources for primary care.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) synthesize high-quality information to support evidence-based clinical practice. In primary care, numerous CPGs must be integrated to address the needs of patients with multiple risks and conditions. The BETTER program aims to improve prevention and screening for cancer and chronic disease in primary care by synthesizing CPGs into integrated, actionable recommendations. We describe the process used to harmonize high-quality cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) CPGs to update the BETTER program. METHODS: A review of CPG databases, repositories, and grey literature was conducted to identify international and Canadian (national and provincial) CPGs for CCDPS in adults 40-69 years of age across 19 topic areas: cancers, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hepatitis C, obesity, osteoporosis, depression, and associated risk factors (i.e., diet, physical activity, alcohol, cannabis, drug, tobacco, and vaping/e-cigarette use). CPGs published in English between 2016 and 2021, applicable to adults, and containing CCDPS recommendations were included. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and a three-step process involving patients, health policy, content experts, primary care providers, and researchers was used to identify and synthesize recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 51 international and Canadian CPGs and 22 guidelines developed by provincial organizations that provided relevant CCDPS recommendations. Clinical recommendations were extracted and reviewed for inclusion using the following criteria: 1) pertinence to primary prevention and screening, 2) relevance to adults ages 40-69, and 3) applicability to diverse primary care settings. Recommendations were synthesized and integrated into the BETTER toolkit alongside resources to support shared decision-making and care paths for the BETTER program. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive care requires the ability to address a person's overall health. An approach to identify high-quality clinical guidance to comprehensively address CCDPS is described. The process used to synthesize and harmonize implementable clinical recommendations may be useful to others wanting to integrate evidence across broad content areas to provide comprehensive care. The BETTER toolkit provides resources that clearly and succinctly present a breadth of clinical evidence that providers can use to assist with implementing CCDPS guidance in primary care.

Maximizing Nutrition Support Practice and Measuring Adherence to Nutrition Support Guidelines in a Canadian Tertiary Care ICU.

OBJECTIVE: New comprehensive guidelines for nutrition support (NS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) can be used to improve quality of care and benchmark current practice. The objective of this study was to (a) compare NS practices in our medical/surgical ICU (MSICU) to 18 recommendations described in the Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines and Society of Critical Care Medicine/American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition guidelines, (b) determine the percentage of goal calories and protein delivered, and (c) identify the barriers to successful NS delivery. DESIGN: This was a prospective observation trial of up to 14 days duration. SETTING: A 24-bed MSICU in a tertiary teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada. PATIENTS: We studied 98 mechanically ventilated patients with any diagnosis who were expected to require either enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN) for >48 hours. MEASUREMENTS: We measured nutritional intake, barriers to nutritional intake, and parameters that allowed comparison of our practice to 18 guidelines. MAIN RESULTS: Mean delivery of protein and energy was 79.3% and 81.1% of goal, respectively. The average time to initiation of EN support was 29.5 ± 23.7 hours. The 3 main reasons for interruption to enteral feeding were airway management issues, procedures, and gastrointestinal intolerance. Enteral feeding during vasopressor therapy was well tolerated. Ten of the 18 guidelines were followed for ≥80% of the time. Protein goals for patients on renal replacement therapy and patients with liver disease were not reached. Head-of-bed positioning was also inadequate. The 13 patients requiring PN all had appropriate indications for this therapy, including gastrointestinal leaks, maldigestion, or malabsorption. CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition support delivery was successful for most patients in this study. However, only 10 of the 18 guidelines were adequately followed. This study helped identify NS practices that work well and others that require strategies for improvement.