Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundGroin hernia management has a significant worldwide diversity with multiple surgical techniques and variable outcomes. The International guidelines for groin hernia management serve to help in groin hernia management, but the acceptance among general surgeons remains unknown. The aim of our study was to gauge the degree of agreement with the guidelines among health care professionals worldwide.MethodsForty-six key statements and recommendations of the International guidelines for groin hernia management were selected and presented at plenary consensus conferences at four international congresses in Europe, the America’s and Asia. Participants could cast their votes through live voting. Additionally, a web survey was sent out to all society members allowing online voting after each congress. Consensus was defined as > 70% agreement among all participants.ResultsIn total 822 surgeons cast their vote on the key statements and recommendations during the four plenary consensus meetings or via the web survey. Consensus was reached on 34 out of 39 (87%) recommendations, and on six out of seven (86%) statements. No consensus was reached on the use of light versus heavy-weight meshes (69%), superior cost-effectiveness of day-case laparo-endoscopic repair (69%), omitting prophylactic antibiotics in hernia repair, general or local versus regional anesthesia in elderly patients (55%) and re-operation in case of immediate postoperative pain (59%).ConclusionGlobally, there is 87% consensus regarding the diagnosis and management of groin hernias. This provides a solid basis for standardizing the care path of patients with groin hernias.

PurposeDiverticular disease is common and of increasing medical and economical importance. Various practice guidelines on diagnostic and treatment on this disease exist. We compared current guidelines on the disease in order to identify concordant and discordant recommendations.MethodEleven national and international guidelines on diverticular disease published over the last 10 years have been identified by a systematic literature review on PubMed and compared in detail for 20 main and 51 subtopics.ResultsThe available evidence for the most aspects was rated as moderate or low. There was concordance for the following items: Diagnosis of diverticulitis should be confirmed by imaging methods (10 of 10 guidelines). Mild forms may be treated out-patient (10/10). Abscesses are treated non-surgically (9/9). Elective surgery should be indicated by individual patient-related factors, only, and be performed laparoscopically (10/10, 9/9 respectively). Main differences were found in the questions of appropriate classification, imaging diagnostic (computed-tomography versus ultra-sound), need for antibiotics in out-patient treatment and mode of surgery for diverticular perforation. Despite growing evidence that antibiotics are not needed for treating mild diverticulitis, only 3/10 guidelines have corresponding recommendations. Hartmann’s procedure has been abandoned several years ago and is now recommended for feculent peritonitis by the three most recent guidelines. In contrast, laparoscopic lavage without resection is not recommended anymore.ConclusionThere are dissents in the recommendations for central aspects regarding the diagnostic and treatment of diverticular disease in recently published guidelines.

IntroductionTo assess the current approaches and perioperative treatments of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRHC) and to highlight similarities and differences with international guidelines and scientific evidence, we conducted a survey for surgeons across the globe.MethodsAll digestive and colorectal surgeons registered with the database of the Research Institute against Digestive Cancer (IRCAD) were invited to take part in the survey via email and through the social media networks of IRCAD.ResultsThere were a total of 440 respondents from 78 countries. Most surgeons worked in the European region (38.6%) followed by the Americas (34.1%), the Eastern Mediterranean region (13.0%), the South-East Asian region (5.9%), the Western Pacific region (4.8%), and Africa (3.2%) respectively. Over half of the respondents performed less than 25% of right hemicolectomies laparoscopically where 4 ports are usually used by 68% of the surgeons. The medial-to-lateral, vessel-first approach is the approach most commonly used (74.1%). The most common extraction site was through a midline incision (53%) and an abdominal drain tube is routinely used by 52% of the surgeons after surgery. A total of 68.6% of the responding surgeons perform the majority of the anastomoses extracorporeally. Finally, we found that the majority of responders (60.7%) routinely used mechanical bowel preparations prior to LRHC.ConclusionRegarding several topics related to LRHC care, a discrepancy was observed between the current medical practice and the recommendations from RCTs and international guidelines and significant regional differences were observed.

To establish what GIN guideline community members see as the desirable features of a guidelines library and registry of guidelines in development An explorative mixed-methods study was undertaken, including scoping activity and semi-structured interviews with guideline developers and endorsers from nine member organizations of the Guidelines International Network. A small number of desirable features of a guideline library were identified: comprehensiveness; single source of information to avoid searching multiple sites; inclusion of related materials; being up to date; searchability and ease of use. No existing library of guidelines was considered to have all of these features. A number of issues arose out of the desire to have a comprehensive library of guidelines, including inclusion of ‘high quality guidelines’ and limiting the scope to include only national guidelines. For registries of guidelines in development, the data set should be limited to avoid placing undue burden on those entering information. Our findings identify ongoing issues for the guideline community, including the tension between comprehensiveness and ease of use, which can result in limited uptake, reporting of guideline quality and the need for clarity on the purpose of any library or registry.

Background This study aims to investigate international measures for pandemic control in the workplace based on guidelines from international organizations to learn from their experiences. Methods We conducted a qualitative study using content analysis. The search method involved reviewing published guidelines on preventing and responding to the COVID-19 pandemic in workplaces. After the screening process, ten guidelines were included in the content analysis. During the analysis, 200 meaning codes, 49 subcategories, and eleven categories were identified. Trustworthiness criteria were utilized to ensure the accuracy and strength of the findings. Results Eleven categories of international content during the COVID-19 pandemic were legal requirements and duties of employees and employers, structural and program changes, risk assessment, risk communication, information and training, internal and external consultation and cooperation, provision of facilities and tools for workplace hygiene, special conditions, special groups, closing and reopening workplaces, reducing contact and exposure and mental health. Conclusions Protecting employees during a pandemic requires a multifaceted approach and strong advocacy. The operational plan for pandemic control should be developed based on the level of risk, with support tailored to employees’ conditions and needs. Cooperation among international organizations is essential to develop a standardized plan and issue comprehensive guidelines in response to health emergencies with a global perspective and local implementation, drawing from the lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background The indicating FTA card is a dry medium used for collection of cervical samples. HPVIR is a multiplex real-time PCR test that detects 12 high-risk human papillomavirus types (hrHPV) and provides single genotype information for HPV16, − 31, − 35, − 39, − 51, − 56, and − 59 and pooled type information for HPV18/45 and HPV33/52/58. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a strategy with cervical samples collected on the FTA card and subsequently analysed with the HPVIR test complies with the criteria of the international guidelines for a clinically validated method for cervical screening. Methods We performed a non-inferiority test comparing the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the candidate test (FTA card and HPVIR) with a clinically validated reference test (Cobas ® HPV test) based on liquid-based cytology (LBC) samples. Two clinical samples (LBC and FTA) were collected from 896 participants in population-based screening. For evaluation of the specificity we used 799 women without ≥ CIN2, and for clinical sensitivity we used 67 women with histologically confirmed ≥ CIN2. The reproducibility was studied by performing inter- and intra-laboratory tests of 558 additional clinical samples. Results The clinical sensitivity and specificity for samples collected on the FTA card and analysed using the HPVIR test were non-inferior to samples analysed with the Cobas® HPV test based on LBC samples (non-inferiority test score, p  = 1.0 × 10 − 2 and p  = 1.89 × 10 − 9 , respectively). Adequate agreement of > 87% was seen in both the intra- and inter-laboratory comparisons. Conclusions Samples collected on the indicating FTA card and analysed with HPVIR test fulfil the requirements of the international guidelines and can therefore be used in primary cervical cancer screening.

Sulfonylureas (SUs) are one of the commonly prescribed oral anti-hyperglycemic agents (AHA) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), either in combination with metformin therapy or alone. However, concern about cardiovascular safety has limited the use of SUs in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Additionally, lack of uniformity in the national and international guidelines regarding the positioning of SUs in the management of diabetes has also been reported. The objective of this review was to assess the various national and international guidelines on diabetes management and understand the recommendations specific to SUs in various scenarios. A total of 33 national and international guidelines on the management of T2DM published in English were evaluated. These guidelines have considered the latest evidence and suggest the use of certain second-generation SUs as second-line therapy or in combination with other AHAs in select population and specific scenarios. Identification of the appropriate population, classification based on underlying risk, thorough assessment of the comorbid conditions, and a step-wise approach for the selection of appropriate SUs is essential for the effective management of T2DM. Additionally, cost-to–benefit ratio should be considered, particularly in LMICs, and SUs could continue to play an important role in such settings.

BackgroundSeveral pivotal studies and international guidelines on the perioperative management of rectal cancer have been published. However, little is known about the current state of perioperative management of rectal cancer patients in clinical practice worldwide.MethodsAn online survey including 13 questions focusing on key topics related to the perioperative management of patients with rectal cancer was conducted among colorectal surgeons registered within the database of the Research Institute Against Digestive Cancer (IRCAD).ResultsA total of 535 respondents from 89 countries participated in the survey. Most surgeons worked in the European region (40.9%). Two hundred and fifty-four respondents (47.5%) performed less than 25% of surgical procedures laparoscopically. The most commonly used definition of the upper limit of the rectum was a fixed distance from the anal verge (23.4%). Magnetic resonance imaging was used to define the upper limit of the rectum by 258 respondents (48.2%). During total mesorectal excision (TME), 301 respondents (56.3%) used a high-tie technique. The most commonly constructed anastomosis was an end-to-end anastomosis (68.2%) with the majority of surgeons performing a leak test intraoperatively (88.9%). A total of 355 respondents (66.4%) constructed a diverting ostomy, and the majority of these surgeons constructed an enterostomy (82%). A total of 208 respondents (39.3%) closed a stoma within 8 weeks. Lastly, 135 respondents (25.2%) introduced a solid diet on postoperative day 1.ConclusionThere is considerable heterogeneity in the perioperative management of rectal cancer patients worldwide with several discrepancies between current international practice and recommendations from international guidelines. To achieve worldwide standardization in rectal cancer care, further research is needed to elucidate the cause of this heterogeneity and find ways of improved implementation of best practice recommendations.

BackgroundThe development of rigorous, high-quality clinical guidelines increases the need for resources and skilled personnel within guideline-producing organizations. While collaboration between organizations provides a unique opportunity to pool resources and save time and effort, the collaboration presents its own unique challenges.ObjectiveTo assess the perceived needs and current challenges of guideline producers worldwide related to guideline development and collaboration efforts.DesignSurvey questions were developed by the Guidelines International Network and the US GRADE Network, pilot-tested among attendees of a guideline development workshop, and disseminated electronically using convenience and snowball sampling methods.ParticipantsA total of 171 respondents representing 30 countries and more than 112 unique organizations were included in this analysis.Main MeasuresThe survey included free-response, multiple-choice, and seven-point Likert-scale questions. Questions assessed respondents’ perceived value of guidelines, resource availability and needs, guideline development processes, and collaboration efforts of their organization.Key ResultsTime required to develop high-quality systematic reviews and guidelines was the most relevant need (median=7; IQR=5.5–7). In-house resources to conduct literature searches (median=4; IQR=3–6) and the resources to develop rigorous guidelines rapidly (median=4; IQR=2–5) were perceived as the least available resources. Difficulties reconciling differences in guideline methodology (median=6; IQR=4–7) and the time required to establish collaborative agreements (median=6; IQR=5–6) were the most relevant barriers to collaboration between organizations. Results also indicated a general need for improvement in conflict of interest (COI) disclosure policies.ConclusionThe survey identified organizational challenges in supporting rigorous guideline development, including the time, resources, and personnel required. Connecting guideline developers to existing databases of high-quality systematic reviews and the use of freely available online platforms may facilitate guideline development. Guideline-producing organizations may also consider allocating resources to hiring or training personnel with expertise in systematic review methodologies or utilizing resources more effectively by establishing collaborations with other organizations.

The use of instrumental tools for improving both the diagnostic accuracy and the prognostic soundness in patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) plays an important role. However, the most recent international guidelines on DOC published by the American and the European Academies of Neurology and by the UK Royal College of Physicians contain heterogeneous recommendations on the implementation of these techniques in the clinical routine for both diagnosis and prognosis. With the present work, starting from the comparison of the DOC guidelines’ recommendations, we look for possible explanations behind such discrepancies considering the adopted methodologies and the reference health systems that could have affected the guidelines’ perspectives. We made a provocative argument about the need to find the most appropriate common methodology to retrieve and grade the evidence, increase the meta-analytic studies, and reduce the health policies that influence on the guidelines development that, in turn, should inform the health policies with the strongest scientific evidence.