Advertisement

Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 41, Issue 7, pp 1340–1342 | Cite as

Ten things you should consider before you believe a clinical practice guideline

  • R. JaeschkeEmail author
  • G. H. Guyatt
  • H. Schünemann
What's New in Intensive Care

Whenever somebody, particular any one in authority, provides guidance to somebody else, a recommendation is born. Similarly, when an authoritative group issues a number of recommendations at one time, healthcare providers are presented with new Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs). CPGs are defined today by World Health Organization as “recommendations intended to assist providers and recipients of health care and other stakeholders to make informed decisions” have been with us from the beginning of medicine. If you were to read a 30-year-old medical textbook, you would see, in essence, a description of facts accompanied by a multitude of recommendations. Although it cannot be said that these textbooks are CPGs, they do provide the essential function of CPGs.

The clinician of today is confronted with multiple documents entitled CPGs. In this context, the editors of Intensive Care Medicineasked us to prepare an editorial addressing choice of the best guidelines. Considering this we...

Keywords

Clinical Practice Guideline Survive Sepsis Campaign Strong Recommendation Decisive Balance Weak Recommendation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Conflicts of interest

All authors write, travel, and gain academic recognition through the promotion of ideas expressed in this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Rubenfeld GD, Webb S, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R, Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including the Pediatric Subgroup (2013) Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med 39:165–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The ARISE Investigators and the ANZICS Clinical Trials Group (2014) Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with early septic shock. N Eng J Med 371:1496–1506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Johansson PI, Aneman A, Vang ML, Winding R, Nebrich L, Nibro HL, Rasmussen BS, Lauridsen JR, Nielsen JS, Oldner A, Pettilä V, Cronhjort MB, Andersen LH, Pedersen UG, Reiter N, Wiis J, White JO, Russell L, Thornberg KJ, Hjortrup PB, Müller RG, Møller MH, Steensen M, Tjäder I, Kilsand K, Odeberg-Wernerman S, Sjøbø B, Bundgaard H, Thyø MA, Lodahl D, Mærkedahl R, Albeck C, Illum D, Kruse M, Winkel P, Perner A; TRISS Trial Group; Scandinavian Critical Care Trials Group (2014) Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock. N Engl J Med 371(15):1381–1391Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Duceppe E, Devereaux PJ (2014) Should we use β-blockers for myocardial infarction? Pol Arch Med Wewn 124:569–572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rochwerg B, Włudarczyk A, Szczeklik W, Alhazzani W, Sindi A, Alshamsi F, Ip W-C, Wang M, Altayyar S, Li G, Fox-Robichaud A, Guyatt G, the FISSH group, (2013) Fluid resuscitation in severe sepsis and septic shock: systematic description of fluids used in randomized trials. Pol Arch Med Wewn 123:603–608PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rochwerg B, Alhazzani W, Sindi A, Heels-Ansdell D, Thabane L, Fox-Robichaud A, Mbuagbaw L, Szczeklik W, Alshamsi F, Altayyar S, Ip WC, Li G, Wang M, Wludarczyk A, Zhou Q, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Jaeschke R, Annane D; Fluids in Sepsis and Septic Shock Group (2013) Fluid resuscitation in sepsis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 161(5):347–355Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bucher HC, Cook D, Holbrook A, Guyatt G (2014) Surrogate outcomes. In: Guyatt G, Meade MO, Cook DJ, Rennie D (eds) Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shah MR, Hasselblad V, Stevenson LW, Binanay C, O’Connor CM, Sopko G, Califf RM (2005) Impact of the pulmonary artery catheter in critically ill patients: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA 294:1664–1670PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Jaeschke R, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Kunz R, Craig J, Montori VM, Bossuyt P, Guyatt GH; GRADE Working Group (2008) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ 336(7653):1106–1110Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schünemann HJ (2011) 1) Guidelines 2.0: do no net harm—the future of practice guideline development in asthma and other diseases. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 11(3):261–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, Guyatt GH (2011) GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 64(4):401–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Andrews JC, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Pottie K, Meerpohl JJ, Coello PA, Rind D, Montori VM, Brito JP, Norris S, Elbarbary M, Post P, Nasser M, Shukla V, Jaeschke R, Brozek J, Djulbegovic B, Guyatt G (2013) GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation—determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol 66(7):726–735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akl EA, El-Hachem P, Abou-Haidar H, Neumann I, Schünemann HJ, Guyatt GH (2014) Considering intellectual, in addition to financial, conflicts of interest proved important in a clinical practice guideline: a descriptive study. J Clin Epidemiol 67(11):1222–1228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schünemann HJ, Osborne M, Moss J, Manthous C, Wagner G, Sicilian L, Ohar J, McDermott S, Lucas L, Jaeschke R, ATS Ethics Conflict of Interest Committee and the Documents Development and Implementation Committee (2009) An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: managing conflict of interest in professional societies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180(6):564–580PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Djulbegovic B, Guyatt GH (2014) Evidence-based practice is not synonymous with delivery of uniform health care. JAMA 312(13):1293–1294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and ESICM 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departments of Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations