Patient engagement in clinical guidelines development: input from > 1000 members of the Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network.

Patient engagement in clinical guidelines development is essential. The results of a self-administered online survey identified themes important to people living with osteoporosis and will inform the development of Osteoporosis Canada clinical guidelines recommendations. INTRODUCTION: Patient engagement is essential in the development of high-quality and relevant guidelines for osteoporosis management. Osteoporosis Canada (OC) is updating its national clinical practice guidelines in collaboration with people living with osteoporosis in the process. METHODS: Using electronic mail, we contacted 6937 members of the Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network (COPN) to provide input on the selection of relevant content, outcomes, and research questions via a self-administered online survey. Close-ended questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and conventional content analysis was conducted for open-ended questions. RESULTS: A total of 1108 individuals completed the survey (97% women, 86% stated they lived with osteoporosis). Most participants considered it critical to have recommendations on physical activity and exercise (74%), fall prevention (69%), nutrition (68%), and initial bone mineral density testing (67%). In addition to preventing fractures, over 75% of respondents stated that consideration of preserving quality of life and ability to perform daily activities, preventing admission to long-term care and fracture-related death, and avoiding serious harms from medications were essential outcomes to consider in evaluating the evidence. In terms of selection of research questions, seven themes emerged from the content analysis including pharmacotherapy, screening and monitoring, diet and supplements, education, exercise, alternative therapies, and pain management. CONCLUSIONS: Patients emphasized that autonomy, mobility, and quality of life are highly valued outcomes and must be integral to practice guideline development. As expected, guidance on pharmacotherapy, screening and monitoring, and fracture prevention were priorities identified to be included in osteoporosis management guidelines.

Methodology for the development of the NHF-McMaster Guideline on Care Models for Haemophilia Management.

BACKGROUND: Rigorous and transparent methods are necessary to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based practice guidelines. We describe the development of the National Hemophilia Foundation-McMaster Guideline on Care Models for Haemophilia Management, which addresses best practices in haemophilia care delivery. METHODS: We assembled a Panel of persons with haemophilia (PWH), parents of PWH, clinical experts and guideline methodologists. Conflicts of interest were disclosed and managed throughout. Panel members and key stakeholders were surveyed to develop the guideline questions and identify patient-important outcomes. Systematic reviews of the literature were conducted for all factors important in decision-making: benefits and harms; patient values and preferences; resource implications; acceptability; equity; and feasibility. We used the GRADE approach to create evidence profiles to evaluate the evidence and present key results. Evidence to Decision frameworks were created to guide the Panel in making evidence-based recommendations. When evidence was very low quality or not available, evidence from other chronic disease populations was presented to the Panel to inform the recommendations. Additionally, we systematically pooled observations from experts, and conducted qualitative interviews exploring key stakeholder experiences and perspectives. The Panel made recommendations for each guideline question and elaborated on research priorities, implementation considerations, and monitoring. Final recommendations were circulated for public and peer review. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the paucity of high-quality evidence typical of a rare condition such as haemophilia, we successfully applied a rigorous and transparent methodology based on GRADE to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

Integrated multidisciplinary care for the management of chronic conditions in adults: an overview of reviews and an example of using indirect evidence to inform clinical practice recommendations in the field of rare diseases.

BACKGROUND: Integrated care models have been adopted for individuals with chronic conditions and for persons with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence from reviews for the effects of integrated multidisciplinary care for chronic conditions in adults and to provide an example of using this evidence to make recommendations for haemophilia care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to January 2016, and reviewed reference lists of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Systematic reviews of at least one randomized study, on adults with non-communicable chronic conditions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two investigators independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. Quality of reviews was assessed using ROBIS, and the evidence assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: We included seven reviews reporting on three chronic conditions. We found low to high quality evidence. Integrated care results in a reduction in mortality; likely a reduction in emergency visits and an improvement in function; little to no difference in quality of life, but shorter hospital stays; and may result in little to no difference in missed days of school or work. No studies reported educational attainment, or patient adherence and knowledge. When used for haemophilia, judgment about the indirectness of the evidence was driven by disease, intervention or outcome characteristics. CONCLUSION: This overview provides the most up to date evidence on integrated multidisciplinary care for chronic conditions in adults, and an example of how it can be used for guidelines in rare diseases.

Care models in the management of haemophilia: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Haemophilia care is commonly provided via multidisciplinary specialized management. To date, there has been no systematic assessment of the impact of haemophilia care delivery models on patient-important outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of published studies assessing the effects of the integrated care model for persons with haemophilia (PWH). SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL up to April 22, 2015, contacted experts in the field, and reviewed reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized and non-randomized studies of PWH or carriers, focusing mainly on the assessment of care models on delivery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two investigators independently screened title, abstract, and full text of retrieved articles for inclusion. Risk of bias and overall quality of evidence was assessed using Cochrane's ACROBAT-NRSI tool and GRADE respectively. Relative risks, mean differences, proportions, and means and their variability were calculated as appropriate. RESULTS: 27 non-randomized studies were included: eight comparative and 19 non-comparative studies. We found low- to very low-quality evidence that in comparison to other models of care, integrated care may reduce mortality, hospitalizations and emergency room visits, may lead to fewer missed days of school and work, and may increase knowledge seeking. CONCLUSION: Our comprehensive review found low- to very low-quality evidence from a limited number of non-randomized studies assessing the impact of haemophilia care models on some patient-important outcomes. While the available evidence suggests that adoption of the integrated care model may provide benefit to PWH, further high-quality research in the field is needed.

NHF-McMaster Guideline on Care Models for Haemophilia Management.

This guideline was developed to identify evidence-based best practices in haemophilia care delivery, and discuss the range of care providers and services that are most important to optimize outcomes for persons with haemophilia (PWH) across the United States. The guideline was developed following specific methods described in detail in this supplement and based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach). Direct evidence from published literature and the haemophilia community, as well as indirect evidence from other chronic diseases, were reviewed, synthesized and applied to create evidence-based recommendations. The Guideline panel suggests that the integrated care model be used over non-integrated care models for PWH (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty in the evidence). For PWH with inhibitors and those at high risk for inhibitor development, the same recommendation was graded as strong, with moderate certainty in the evidence. The panel suggests that a haematologist, a specialized haemophilia nurse, a physical therapist, a social worker and round-the-clock access to a specialized coagulation laboratory be part of the integrated care team, over an integrated care team that does not include all of these components (conditional recommendation, very low certainty in the evidence). Based on available evidence, the integrated model of care in its current structure, is suggested for optimal care of PWH. There is a need for further appropriately designed studies that address unanswered questions about specific outcomes and the optimal structure of the integrated care delivery model in haemophilia.

Oral immunotherapy for IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cow's milk is a common cause of food allergy in children. Children usually outgrow cow's milk allergy by the age of 3-5 years, but some will have persistent symptoms beyond childhood. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies to assess the evidence supporting the use of oral immunotherapy in IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy to inform the World Allergy Organization guidelines. Of 1034 screened articles published until May 2011, five RCTs and five observational studies fulfilled a priori specified inclusion criteria. RCTs including 218 patients showed that oral immunotherapy, compared to elimination diet alone, increased the likelihood of achieving full tolerance of cow's milk [relative risk: 10.0 (95% CI: 4.1-24.2)]. Adverse effects of immunotherapy include frequent local symptoms (16% of doses), mild laryngospasm [relative risk: 12.9 (1.7-98.6)], mild asthma [rate ratio: 3.8 (2.9-5.0)], reactions requiring oral glucocorticosteroids [relative risk: 11.3 (2.7-46.5)] or intramuscular epinephrine injection [rate ratio 5.8 (1.6-21.9)]. Results of observational studies were consistent with those of RCTs. Despite the availability of RCTs, the overall low quality of evidence leaves important uncertainty about anticipated effects of immunotherapy due to very serious imprecision of the estimates of effects and the likelihood of publication bias for some of the critical outcomes. A potentially large benefit of oral immunotherapy in patients with cow's milk allergy may be counterbalanced by frequent and sometimes serious adverse effects. Additional, larger RCTs measuring all patient-important outcomes are still needed.

Effects of higher- versus lower-protein diets on health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Numerous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in first tier medical journals have evaluated the health effects of diets high in protein. We conducted a rigorous systematic review of RCTs comparing higher- and lower-protein diets. METHODS: We searched several electronic databases up to July 2011 for studies focusing on patient-important outcomes (for example, cardiovascular disease) and secondary outcomes such as risk factors for chronic disease (for example, adiposity). RESULTS: We identified 111 articles reporting on 74 trials. Pooled effect sizes using standardised mean differences (SMDs) were small to moderate and favoured higher-protein diets for weight loss (SMD -0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.56 to -0.17), body mass index (-0.37, CI -0.56 to 0.19), waist circumference (-0.43, CI -0.69 to -0.16), blood pressure (systolic: -0.21, CI -0.32 to -0.09 and diastolic: -0.18, CI -0.29 to -0.06), high-density lipoproteins (HDL 0.25, CI 0.07 to 0.44), fasting insulin (-0.20, CI -0.39 to -0.01) and triglycerides (-0.51, CI -0.78 to -0.24). Sensitivity analysis of studies with lower risk of bias abolished the effect on HDL and fasting insulin, and reduced the effect on triglycerides. We observed nonsignificant effects on total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins, C-reactive protein, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, and surrogates for bone and kidney health. Adverse gastrointestinal events were more common with high-protein diets. Multivariable meta-regression analysis showed no significant dose response with higher protein intake. CONCLUSIONS: Higher-protein diets probably improve adiposity, blood pressure and triglyceride levels, but these effects are small and need to be weighed against the potential for harms.