How to design effective educational videos for teaching evidence-based medicine to undergraduate learners - systematic review with complementing qualitative research to develop a practicable guide.

BACKGROUND: eLearning can be an effective tool to achieve learning objectives. It facilitates asynchronous distance learning, increasing flexibility for learners and instructors. In this context, the high educational value of videos provides an invaluable primary component for longitudinal digital curricula, especially for maintaining knowledge on otherwise rarely taught subjects. Although literature concerning eLearning evaluation exists, research comprehensively describing how to design effective educational videos is lacking. In particular, studies on the requirements and design goals of educational videos need to be complemented by qualitative research using grounded theory methodology. METHODS: Due to the paucity of randomized controlled trials in this area, there is an urgent need to generate recommendations based on a broader fundament than a literature search alone. Thus, the authors have employed grounded theory as a guiding framework, augmented by Mayring's qualitative content analysis and commonly used standards. An adaptive approach was conducted based on a literature search and qualitative semi-structured interviews. Drawing on these results, the authors elaborated a guide for creating effective educational videos. RESULTS: The authors identified 40 effective or presumedly effective factors fostering the success of video-based eLearning in teaching evidence-based medicine, providing a ready-to-use checklist. The information collected via the interviews supported and enriched much of the advice found in the literature. DISCUSSION: To the authors' knowledge, this type of comprehensive guide for video-based eLearning needs has not previously been published. The interviews considerably contributed to the results. Due to the grounded theory-based approach, in particular, consensus was achieved without the presence of a formal expert panel. Although the guide was created with a focus on teaching evidence-based medicine, due to the general study selection process and research approach, the recommendations are applicable to a wide range of subjects in medical education where the teaching aim is to impart conceptual knowledge.

Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Status epilepticus (SE) is the second most common neurological emergency in adults. Despite improvements in the management of acute neurological conditions over the last decade, mortality is still durably high. Because a gap has emerged between SE management based on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and actual clinical practice, we conducted a systematic review of CPGs, assessing their quality, outlining commonalities and discrepancies in recommendations, and highlighting research gaps. METHODS: We searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases and other gray literature sources (nine among guideline registries, evidence-based medicine databases, point-of-care tools; seven websites of governmental organizations and international neurologic societies) in December 2021 (updated in November 2023). The units of analysis were CPGs that included recommendations on the diagnostic and/or therapeutic management of SE in adults. The quality of the CPGs was assessed using the AGREE II tool. RESULTS: Fifteen CPGs were included. The "Applicability" domain was assigned the lowest median score of 10%. The domains "Stakeholder Involvement", "Rigor of Development," and "Editorial Independence" were as well generally underrated. Recommendations on general and diagnostic management and on organizational interventions were fragmented and scattered. Recommendations on pre-hospital and hospital treatment of early-onset and refractory SE were broadly agreed, whereas there was less agreement on the treatment model and medications for established SE and super-refractory SE. SIGNIFICANCE: The CPGs for the management of SE developed in recent years are flawed by several methodological issues and discrepancies in the coverage of important topics. The gap between CPG-based management of SE and actual clinical practice may be due in part to the inherent limitations of the CPGs produced so far.

Defining D-irAEs: consensus-based disease definitions for the diagnosis of dermatologic adverse events from immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

With an increasing number of patients eligible for immune checkpoint inhibitors, the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is on the rise. Dermatologic immune-related adverse events (D-irAEs) are the most common and earliest to manifest, often with important downstream consequences for the patient. Current guidelines lack clarity in terms of diagnostic criteria for D-irAEs. The goal of this project is to better define D-irAE for the purposes of identification, diagnosis, and future study of this important group of diseases.The objectives of this project were to develop consensus guidance for an approach to D-irAEs including disease definitions and severity grading. Knowing that consensus among oncologists, dermatologists, and irAE subspecialists would be critical for usability, we formed a Dermatologic irAE Disease Definition Panel. The panel was composed of 34 experts, including oncologists, dermatologists, a rheumatologist, and an allergist/immunologist from 22 institutions across the USA and internationally. A modified Delphi consensus process was used, with two rounds of anonymous ratings by panelists and two virtual meetings to discuss areas of controversy. Panelists rated content for usability, appropriateness, and accuracy on 9-point scales in electronic surveys and provided free text comments. A working group aggregated survey responses and incorporated them into revised definitions. Consensus was based on numeric ratings using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method with prespecified definitions.Following revisions based on panelist feedback, all items received consensus in the second round of ratings. Consensus definitions were achieved for 10 core D-irAE diagnoses: ICI-vitiligo, ICI-lichen planus, ICI-psoriasis, ICI-exanthem, ICI-bullous pemphigoid, ICI-Grover's, ICI-eczematous, ICI-eruptive atypical squamous proliferation, ICI-pruritus without rash, and ICI-erosive mucocutaneous. A standard evaluation for D-irAE was also found to reach consensus, with disease-specific exceptions detailed when necessary. Each disorder's description includes further details on disease subtypes, symptoms, supportive exam findings, and three levels of diagnostic certainty (definite, probable, and possible).These consensus-driven disease definitions standardize D-irAE classification in a useable framework for multiple disciplines and will be the foundation for future work. Given consensus on their accuracy and usability from a representative panel group, we anticipate that they can be used broadly across clinical and research settings.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) recommendations on intratumoral immunotherapy clinical trials (IICT): from premalignant to metastatic disease.

BACKGROUND: Intratumorally delivered immunotherapies have the potential to favorably alter the local tumor microenvironment and may stimulate systemic host immunity, offering an alternative or adjunct to other local and systemic treatments. Despite their potential, these therapies have had limited success in late-phase trials for advanced cancer resulting in few formal approvals. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to determine how to design clinical trials with the greatest chance of demonstrating the benefits of intratumoral immunotherapy for patients with cancers across all stages of pathogenesis. METHODS: An Intratumoral Immunotherapy Clinical Trials Expert Panel composed of international key stakeholders from academia and industry was assembled. A multiple choice/free response survey was distributed to the panel, and the results of this survey were discussed during a half-day consensus meeting. Key discussion points are summarized in the following manuscript. RESULTS: The panel determined unique clinical trial designs tailored to different stages of cancer development-from premalignant to unresectable/metastatic-that can maximize the chance of capturing the effect of intratumoral immunotherapies. Design elements discussed included study type, patient stratification and exclusion criteria, indications of randomization, study arm determination, endpoints, biological sample collection, and response assessment with biomarkers and imaging. Populations to prioritize for the study of intratumoral immunotherapy, including stage, type of cancer and line of treatment, were also discussed along with common barriers to the development of these local treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The SITC Intratumoral Immunotherapy Clinical Trials Expert Panel has identified key considerations for the design and implementation of studies that have the greatest potential to capture the effect of intratumorally delivered immunotherapies. With more effective and standardized trial designs, the potential of intratumoral immunotherapy can be realized and lead to regulatory approvals that will extend the benefit of these local treatments to the patients who need them the most.

Development and prioritisation of policy recommendations for medication safety improvement for intensive care units: a European Association of Hospital Pharmacists Special Interest Group Delphi Study.

OBJECTIVES: Medication errors (MEs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the healthcare system. Patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) are potentially more susceptible to MEs due to severity of illness, the complexity of treatments they receive and the challenging nature of the ICU setting. The European Association of Hospital Pharmacists established a Special Interest Group (SIG) to undertake a programme of work to develop and prioritise recommendations to support medication safety improvement in ICUs across Europe. METHODS: Initial policy recommendations for medication safety within the ICU environment were developed following reviews of the literature and engagement with relevant stakeholders. A Delphi panel of 21 members of the SIG, that comprised healthcare professionals (HCPs) with expertise in ICU and/or medication safety, was convened in 2022. We conducted two rounds using a modified Delphi technique whereby participants anonymously ranked on a 9-point Likert Scale the policy recommendations according to their priority for implementation. RESULTS: In total, 32 policy recommendations were developed. In Delphi Round 1, 19 HCPs participated; consensus was achieved on most recommendations and partial consensus on six. In Delphi Round 2, 18 HCPs participated. After two Delphi rounds, consensus was achieved on all 32 recommendations. All recommendations were considered 'high priority' except one that was considered 'medium priority'. CONCLUSIONS: Through this study it was possible to develop and prioritise evidence-based policy recommendations to enhance medication safety, which may contribute to reducing MEs in ICUs across Europe. All recommendations were considered 'high priority' for implementation except one, indicating the perceived value of these recommendations in improving medication safety through preventing MEs in ICUs.

Evidence-based Medication knowledge Brokers in Residential Aged CarE (EMBRACE): protocol for a helix-counterbalanced randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical practice guidelines recommend against the routine use of psychotropic medications in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Knowledge brokers are individuals or groups who facilitate the transfer of knowledge into practice. The objective of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using knowledge brokers to translate Australia's new Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Appropriate Use of Psychotropic Medications in People Living with Dementia and in Residential Aged Care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Evidence-based Medication knowledge Brokers in Residential Aged CarE (EMBRACE) trial is a helix-counterbalanced randomised controlled trial. The 12-month trial will be conducted in up to 19 RACFs operated by four Australian aged care provider organisations in Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia and Queensland. RACFs will be randomised to receive three levels of implementation strategies (knowledge broker service, pharmacist-led quality use of medications education activities and distribution of the Guidelines and supporting materials) across three medication contexts (antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants). Implementation strategies will be delivered by an embedded on-site aged care pharmacist working at a system level across each participating RACF. All RACFs will receive all implementation strategies simultaneously but for different medication contexts. The primary outcome will be a composite dichotomous measure of 6-month RACF-level concordance with Guideline recommendations and good practice statements among people using antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants for changed behaviours. Secondary outcomes will include proportion of residents with Guideline concordant use of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants measured at the RACF-level and proportion of residents with psychotropic medication use, hospitalisation, falls, falls with injury, polypharmacy, quality of life, activities of daily living, medication incidents and behavioural incidents measured at the RACF-level. DISCUSSION: The EMBRACE trial investigates a novel guideline implementation strategy to improve the safe and effective use of psychotropic medications in RACFs. We anticipate that the findings will provide new information on the potential role of knowledge brokers for successful and cost-effective guideline implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12623001141639. Registered 6 November 2023 - retrospectively registered, https://www.anzctr.org.au/TrialSearch.aspx .

Designing tailored maintenance strategies for systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines using the Portfolio Maintenance by Test-Treatment (POMBYTT) framework.

BACKGROUND: Organizations face diverse contexts and requirements when updating and maintaining their portfolio, or pool, of systematic reviews or clinical practice guidelines they need to manage. We aimed to develop a comprehensive, theoretical framework that might enable the design and tailoring of maintenance strategies for portfolios containing systematic reviews and guidelines. METHODS: We employed a conceptual approach combined with a literature review. Components of the diagnostic test-treatment pathway used in clinical healthcare were transferred to develop a framework specifically for systematic review and guideline portfolio maintenance strategies. RESULTS: We developed the Portfolio Maintenance by Test-Treatment (POMBYTT) framework comprising diagnosis, staging, management, and monitoring components. To illustrate the framework's components and their elements, we provided examples from both a clinical healthcare test-treatment pathway and a clinical practice guideline maintenance scenario. Additionally, our literature review provided possible examples for the elements in the framework, such as detection variables, detection tests, and detection thresholds. We furthermore provide three example strategies using the framework, of which one was based on living recommendations strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The developed framework might support the design of maintenance strategies that could contain multiple options besides updating to manage a portfolio (e.g. withdrawing and archiving), even in the absence of the target condition. By making different choices for variables, tests, test protocols, indications, management options, and monitoring, organizations might tailor their maintenance strategy to suit specific contexts and needs. The framework's elements could potentially aid in the design by being explicit about the operational aspects of maintenance strategies. This might also be helpful for end-users and other stakeholders of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines.

Undertaking Studies Within A Trial to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for randomised controlled trials: lessons learnt from the PROMETHEUS research programme.

Background: Randomised controlled trials ('trials') are susceptible to poor participant recruitment and retention. Studies Within A Trial are the strongest methods for testing the effectiveness of strategies to improve recruitment and retention. However, relatively few of these have been conducted. Objectives: PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to facilitate at least 25 Studies Within A Trial evaluating recruitment or retention strategies. We share our experience of delivering the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme, and the lessons learnt for undertaking randomised Studies Within A Trial. Design: A network of 10 Clinical Trials Units and 1 primary care research centre committed to conducting randomised controlled Studies Within A Trial of recruitment and/or retention strategies was established. Promising recruitment and retention strategies were identified from various sources including Cochrane systematic reviews, the Study Within A Trial Repository, and existing prioritisation exercises, which were reviewed by patient and public members to create an initial priority list of seven recruitment and eight retention interventions. Host trial teams could apply for funding and receive support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to undertake Studies Within A Trial. We also tested the feasibility of undertaking co-ordinated Studies Within A Trial, across multiple host trials simultaneously. Setting: Clinical trials unit-based trials recruiting or following up participants in any setting in the United Kingdom were eligible. Participants: Clinical trials unit-based teams undertaking trials in any clinical context in the United Kingdom. Interventions: Funding of up to £5000 and support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to design, implement and report Studies Within A Trial. Main outcome measures: Number of host trials funded. Results: Forty-two Studies Within A Trial were funded (31 host trials), across 12 Clinical Trials Units. The mean cost of a Study Within A Trial was £3535. Twelve Studies Within A Trial tested the same strategy across multiple host trials using a co-ordinated Study Within A Trial design, and four used a factorial design. Two recruitment and five retention strategies were evaluated in more than one host trial. PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial will add 18% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane systematic review of recruitment strategies, and 79% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane review of retention strategies. For retention, we found that pre-notifying participants by card, letter or e-mail before sending questionnaires was effective, as was the use of pens, and sending personalised text messages to improve questionnaire response. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others planning Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient and public involvement partners; prioritising and selecting strategies to evaluate and elements to consider when designing a Study Within A Trial; obtaining governance approvals; implementing Studies Within A Trial, including individual and co-ordinated Studies Within A Trials; and reporting Study Within A Trials. Limitations: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted five Studies Within A Trial, being either delayed (n = 2) or prematurely terminated (n = 3). Conclusions: PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial significantly increased the evidence base for recruitment and retention strategies. When provided with both funding and practical support, host trial teams successfully implemented Studies Within A Trial. Future work: Future research should identify and target gaps in the evidence base, including widening Study Within A Trial uptake, undertaking more complex Studies Within A Trial and translating Study Within A Trial evidence into practice. Study registration: All Studies Within A Trial in the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme had to be registered with the Northern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research Study Within A Trial Repository. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/55/80) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

A Study Within A Trial is a research study nested inside a larger 'host trial', promoting the use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to do Study Within A Trial routine practice in clinical trial units by funding and supporting at least 25 Studies Within A Trial. The best way to test health and social care treatments is to do a randomised controlled trial ('trial'), where some patients get the treatment being tested and some do not. The results of different groups are compared to see if the treatment improves care. Recruiting patients and keeping them involved in trials is often very difficult. Research teams often do not know how best to recruit and keep patients engaged as the methods have not been tested to see if they work. The best way to test these methods is by doing a Study Within A Trial. We test a programme of Studies Within A Trial for recruiting and keeping patients engaged in trials. Trial teams were able to apply for funding of up to £5000 and receive support from Promoting the use of Study Within A Trial team to do Studies Within A Trial. We used our experience of doing Studies Within A Trial to outline lessons learnt for doing Studies Within A Trial. We funded 42 Studies Within A Trial and gave teams necessary advice to do them. We significantly increased the knowledge for both recruitment and retention strategies, and found 'pre-notifying' before sending questionnaires, sending pens and personalised text messages were all effective for increasing responses by participants. We tested Studies Within A Trial across several different trials at the same time to find out more quickly whether their methods worked. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others doing Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient partners; picking the right strategy to test; getting ethical approvals; how to do and report Studies Within A Trial. Promoting the use of studies within a trial was successful and supported more Studies Within A Trial than planned. We hope our experience will support those doing Studies Within A Trial in the future.

Real-world treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in the USA, Europe and Asia.

Aim: To characterize real-world patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and treating physicians and evaluate treatment trends and baseline concordance versus guidelines internationally. Materials & methods: Retrospective, cross-sectional data from the Ipsos Global Oncology Monitor database 2018-2020 were used for descriptive analysis of mHSPC patients, treating physicians and treatment utilization. Results: Among the 6198 mHSPC patients from five countries, the most common treatment was either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) monotherapy or first-generation androgen receptor inhibitor + ADT. Second-generation androgen receptor inhibitor use was only initiating but increasing over the study period. Conclusion: Despite contemporaneous guidelines recommending treatment intensification of ADT in combination with novel antihormonals or docetaxel, 76.1% of reported mHSPC patients received non-guideline-concordant care.

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer among men worldwide and a leading cause of cancer-related death globally. Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) refers to the stage of prostate cancer where it has spread to other parts of the body ('metastatic') but still responds to hormonal therapy ('hormone-sensitive'), such as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Treatment guidelines around the world for men with mHSPC have changed over time, but there remains a lack of understanding of how well guidelines are followed in real-world practice. Consequently, this study analyzes real-world data from five countries between 2018 and 2020 to understand treatment patterns, baseline concordance versus guidelines and potential drivers of treatment trends. The study found prevalent use of ADT monotherapy and older antihormonal agents, and only marginal but increasing use of novel antihormonals in real-world practice. These practices deviate from guidelines from the study period, which generally recommended ADT combination with either newer antihormonal agents or docetaxel for patients with mHSPC. Overall, the proportion of the 6198 patients treated with non­guideline-concordant therapies was 76.1%. Since guideline-recommended care is associated with better outcomes, this baselining finding highlights the need for appropriate treatment selection and intensification for mHSPC patients.

Knowledge about the best practice guidelines in the nursing degree: A non-randomized post-test design.

AIM: To compare knowledge of Nursing Degree students about Best Practice Guidelines when there are included as teaching content in a subject vs knowledge through having the usual internship experience without teaching specific guidelines contents. DESIGN: Non-randomized post-test-only design with a comparison group. METHODS: 143 students of the nursing degree at the Autonomous University of Barcelona were recruited. The intervention group received a classroom training in three Best Practice Guidelines with Problem-Based Learning methodology. The comparison group only attended internship, without specific guidelines contents. Knowledge was evaluated with an ad hoc post intervention questionnaire. The information was collected between 2016 and 2018. RESULTS: The average score of knowledge was low, 5.1 out of 10, and differs between guides. The best results were obtained by the students with internships and that had consulted the guides on some occasions. Synchronized effort and leadership in Academia and Healthcare are needed to favour evidence-based practice. The combination of the consultation of the Best Practice Guidelines in theoretical learning combined with the practice, increases the knowledge of the Best Practice Guidelines and will favour the implementation of evidence-based practice. Some students were involved in questionnaire design.

Assessing the methodological strengths and limitations of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) guidelines: a critical appraisal using AGREE II and AGREE-REX tool

Background The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has provided open-access guidelines for cancer since 2014. However, no independent assessment of their quality has been conducted to date. This study aimed to critically evaluate the quality of SEOM guidelines on cancer treatment. Methods Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines. Results We assessed 33 guidelines, with 84.8% rated as “high quality”. The highest median standardized scores (96.3) were observed in the domain “clarity of presentation”, whereas “applicability” was distinctively low (31.4), with only one guideline scoring above 60%. SEOM guidelines did not include the views and preferences of the target population, nor did specify updating methods. Conclusions Although developed with acceptable methodological rigor, SEOM guidelines could be improved in the future, particularly in terms of clinical applicability and patient perspectives (AU)

Ten-Year Follow-Up of Women at High Risk for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Otago and Southland, New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Care for families affected by Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer (FBOC) is challenging as a broad range of professions and specialties are involved. The aim was to review management and outcomes for a cohort of women at high risk for familial breast and ovarian cancer. METHODS: Ten-year retrospective follow-up study of individuals in Southern New Zealand  assessed by Genetic Health Service New Zealand to be high risk for FBOC and without a personal cancer diagnosis at time of consultation. RESULTS: Twenty women were identified; twelve underwent genetic testing, and a pathogenic BRCA variant was identified in eleven. Eight women had no testing, as no index case was available. Guidelines had been fully adhered to in 55% of women, regardless of BRCA status. Six did not undergo appropriate breast surveillance. To date, seven of the 11 patients who tested positive for a pathogenic BRCA variant (64%) had risk-reducing surgeries. Two women were diagnosed with breast cancer on surveillance imaging; none were diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Four women were lost to follow-up, one of whom subsequently presented with a symptomatic breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study providing long-term data for FBOC in New Zealand. Overall, guidelines were followed satisfactorily, but some women did not receive appropriate surveillance or referrals. An integrated interdisciplinary long-term care provision model in New Zealand might help to address gaps in FBOC surveillance and management.

Assessing the methodological strengths and limitations of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) guidelines: a critical appraisal using AGREE II and AGREE-REX tool.

BACKGROUND: The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has provided open-access guidelines for cancer since 2014. However, no independent assessment of their quality has been conducted to date. This study aimed to critically evaluate the quality of SEOM guidelines on cancer treatment. METHODS: Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines. RESULTS: We assessed 33 guidelines, with 84.8% rated as "high quality". The highest median standardized scores (96.3) were observed in the domain "clarity of presentation", whereas "applicability" was distinctively low (31.4), with only one guideline scoring above 60%. SEOM guidelines did not include the views and preferences of the target population, nor did specify updating methods. CONCLUSIONS: Although developed with acceptable methodological rigor, SEOM guidelines could be improved in the future, particularly in terms of clinical applicability and patient perspectives.

National Health and Medical Research Council statement on electronic cigarettes: 2022 update.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use in Australia has rapidly increased since the 2017 National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Chief Executive Officer (CEO) statement on e-cigarettes. The type of products available and the demographic characteristics of people using these products have changed. New evidence has been published and there is growing concern among public health professionals about the increased use, particularly among young people who do not currently smoke combustible cigarettes. The combination of these issues led NHMRC to review the current evidence and provide an updated statement on e-cigarettes. In this article, we describe the comprehensive process used to review the evidence and develop the 2022 NHMRC CEO statement on electronic cigarettes. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: E-cigarettes can be harmful; all e-cigarette users are exposed to chemicals and toxins that have the potential to cause adverse health effects. There are no health benefits of using e-cigarettes if you do not currently smoke tobacco cigarettes. Adolescents are more likely to try e-cigarettes if they are exposed to e-cigarettes on social media. Short term e-cigarette use may help some smokers to quit who have been previously unsuccessful with other smoking cessation aids. There are other proven safe and effective options available to help smokers to quit. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT: The evidence base for the harms of e-cigarette use has strengthened since the previous NHMRC statement. Significant gaps in the evidence base remain, especially about the longer term health harms of using e-cigarettes and the toxicity of many chemicals in e-cigarettes inhaled as an aerosol.

Cough in Children and Adults: Diagnosis, Assessment and Management (CICADA). Summary of an updated position statement on chronic cough in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Cough is the most common symptom leading to medical consultation. Chronic cough results in significant health care costs, impairs quality of life, and may indicate the presence of a serious underlying condition. Here, we present a summary of an updated position statement on cough management in the clinical consultation. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: Assessment of children and adults requires a focused history of chronic cough to identify any red flag cough pointers that may indicate an underlying disease. Further assessment with examination should include a chest x-ray and spirometry (when age > 6 years). Separate paediatric and adult diagnostic management algorithms should be followed. Management of the underlying condition(s) should follow specific disease guidelines, as well as address adverse environmental exposures and patient/carer concerns. First Nations adults and children should be considered a high risk group. The full statement from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand and Lung Foundation Australia for managing chronic cough is available at https://lungfoundation.com.au/resources/cicada-full-position-statement. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT: Algorithms for assessment and diagnosis of adult and paediatric chronic cough are recommended. High quality evidence supports the use of child-specific chronic cough management algorithms to improve clinical outcomes, but none exist in adults. Red flags that indicate serious underlying conditions requiring investigation or referral should be identified. Early and effective treatment of chronic wet/productive cough in children is critical. Culturally specific strategies for facilitating the management of chronic cough in First Nations populations should be adopted. If the chronic cough does not resolve or is unexplained, the patient should be referred to a respiratory specialist or cough clinic.

Endoscopic management of sinonasal tumours in the Nordic university hospitals: a survey.

PURPOSE: The Nordic countries (27 M) all have comparable, publicly funded healthcare systems, and the management of sinonasal tumours is centralised to the 21 university hospitals. We sought to assess and compare the treatment practice of sinonasal tumours across the Nordic countries. METHODS: A web-based questionnaire was sent to all university hospital departments of otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery in the Nordic countries. RESULTS: Answers were obtained from all 21 Nordic university hospitals. The endoscopic approach was widely utilised by all, with most (62%) centres reporting 3-4 surgeons performing endoscopic sinonasal tumour surgery. Finland reported the lowest rates of centralisation among university hospitals despite having the highest number of 0.1-1 M catchment population hospitals. Most centres (88%) opted for the endoscopic approach in a patient case warranting medial maxillectomy. In a case of a Kadish C esthesioneuroblastoma, most (52%) of the centres preferred an endoscopic approach. Most centres (62%) reported favouring the endoscopic approach in a case describing a juvenile angiofibroma. Regarding a case describing a sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma, consensus was tied (38% vs. 38%) between endoscopic resection followed by postoperative (chemo)radiotherapy (RT/CRT) and induction chemotherapy followed by RT/CRT or surgery followed by RT/CRT. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic approach was widely utilised in the Nordic countries. The case-based replies showed differences in treatment practice, both internationally and nationally. The rate of centralisation among university hospitals remains relatively low, despite the rarity of these tumours.

Controversies in terminology associated with management of BCG-unresponsive NMIBC in Asia-Pacific.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the understanding of terminologies and management patterns of bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-unresponsive nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) in six territories in Asia-Pacific. METHODS: This study involved two phases: (1) a survey with 32 urologists and 7 medical oncologists (MOs) and (2) a factorial experiment and in-depth interviews with 23 urologists and 2 MOs. All clinicians had ≥8 years' experience managing NMIBC patients in Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Data from Phase 1 were summarized using descriptive statistics; content and thematic analyses applied in Phase 2. RESULTS: In phase 1, 35% of clinicians defined BCG-unresponsive as BCG-refractory, -relapse and -resistant, 6% defined it as BCG-refractory and -relapse; 22% classified BCG-failure as BCG-refractory, -relapse, -resistant, and when muscle-invasive bladder cancer is detected. If eligible and willing, 50% (interquartile range [IQR], 50%-80%) of BCG-unresponsive patients would undergo radical cystectomy (RC), and 50% (IQR 20%-50%) of RC-eligible patients would receive bladder-sparing treatment or surveillance. In phase 2, we found that 32%, 88%, and 48% of clinicians, respectively, used "BCG-unresponsive," "BCG-refractory," and "BCG-relapse" in clinical practice but with no consistent interpretation of the terms. Compared with EAU definitions, 8%-60% of clinicians appropriately classified 9 tumor types that are persistent or recurrent after adequate BCG. Fifty percent of clinicians mentioned a lack of bladder-preserving treatment that outperforms RC in quality of life as a reason to retreat BCG-unresponsive patients with BCG. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed varied understanding and application of BCG-unresponsive terminologies in practice. There is a need for a uniform and simple definition of BCG-unresponsive disease in Asia-Pacific.