Improving the applicability of guidelines on nonmelanoma skin cancer in frail older adults: a multidisciplinary expert consensus and systematic review of current guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Balancing treatment decisions in frail older adults with nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) can be challenging. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) could provide assistance. OBJECTIVES: To collect and prioritize items related to frail older adults with NMSC for integration into CPGs and to assess the current extent of this integration. METHODS: Items were collected and prioritized by a multidisciplinary working group (29 members) using a modified Delphi procedure and a five-point Likert scale. To assess current integration of these items in CPGs, a systematic review was subsequently performed by two independent reviewers using five medical databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, SUMsearch and Trip Database), websites of guideline developers/databases, and (inter)national dermatological societies. RESULTS: Prioritization of a final 13-item list showed that 'limited life expectancy' (4·5 ± 0·9) and 'treatment goals other than cure' (4·4 ± 0·7) were most desired to be integrated into CPGs; both were included in six (46%) of the CPGs found (n = 13). Attention to 'tumour characteristics' and 'comorbidities' were included in CPGs most often (100% and 77%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: More attention to items related to frail older adults in NMSC CPGs is broadly desired, but CPG integration of these items is currently limited. More integration might stimulate more holistic, personalized and patient-centred care in frail older adults.

Prioritizing dermatoses: rationally selecting guideline topics.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guideline (CPG) development starts with selecting appropriate topics, as resources to develop a guideline are limited. However, a standardized method for topic selection is commonly missing and the way different criteria are used to prioritize is not clear. OBJECTIVES: To select and prioritize dermatological topics for CPG development and elucidate criteria dermatologists find important in selecting guideline topics. METHODS: All 410 dermatologists in the Netherlands were asked to create a top 20 of dermatological topics for which a guideline would be desirable, regardless of existing guidelines. They also rated, on a 5-point Likert scale, 10 determinative criteria derived from a combined search in literature and across (inter)national guideline developers. Top 20 topics received scores ranging from 0.01 to 0.2 and combined scores yielded a total score. RESULTS: The 118 surveys (response 29%) identified 157 different topics. Melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, psoriasis and atopic dermatitis are top priority guideline topics. Venous leg ulcer, vasculitis, varicose veins, urticaria, acne, Lyme borreliosis, cutaneous lupus erythematosus, pruritus, syphilis, lymphoedema, decubitus ulcer, hidradenitis suppurativa, androgenic alopecia and bullous pemphigoïd complete the top 20. A further 15 topics have overlapping confidence intervals. Mortality and healthcare costs are regarded as less important criteria in topic selection (P < 0.04), than other criteria like the potential to reduce unwanted variation in practice. CONCLUSION: Dermatological professional organizations worldwide succeeded in developing guidelines for all top 20 topics. Respondents mostly agree with (inter)national guideline programmes and literature concerning the criteria important to selecting guideline topics.

A national study on adherence to a basal cell carcinoma guideline; development of a tool to assess guideline adherence.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guideline implementation may be at variance with actual daily practice, as guideline adherence is a complex process depending on many actors and factors. Feedback regarding adherence is essential to monitor the effect that a guideline has in clinical practice and whether or not the quality of care is raised by implementation. OBJECTIVES: Developing a tool for obtaining and giving nationwide feedback regarding adherence. METHODS: From February 2010 to June 2013, a 32-item questionnaire was used as an audit tool during committee visits to assess adherence across 37 dermatological centres in The Netherlands. The questions were derived from the recommendations by the Dutch Dermatological and Venereological Society (NVDV) in the Dutch Basal Cell Carcinoma (BCC) guideline. Five selected medical records per dermatologist were audited and the results were discussed with the audited centre. Data were pooled to calculate the compliance with each recommendation across all participating centres. RESULTS: Adherence to recommended actions varied considerably (20·2-100%) across the domains of prevention, diagnostics, treatments and aftercare. Using and reporting surgical margins, giving patient advice, restricting the use of cryosurgery for certain BCCs and reporting on prognostic factors all failed to reach a threshold of 80%. Nonadherence to recommended actions proved to be related to whether or not a dermatologist was directly involved. CONCLUSIONS: The findings emphasize the importance of direct feedback to practitioners regarding adherence. Furthermore, together with existing frameworks, the method described could be used by developers in a guideline update to identify and anticipate barriers to successful implementation.

Summary of the Dutch S3-guidelines on the treatment of psoriasis 2011. Dutch Society of Dermatology and Venereology.

This document provides a summary of the Dutch S3-guidelines on the treatment of psoriasis. These guidelines were finalized in December 2011 and contain unique chapters on the treatment of psoriasis of the face and flexures, childhood psoriasis as well as the patient's perspective on treatment. They also cover the topical treatment of psoriasis, photo(chemo)therapy, conventional systemic therapy and biological therapy.