Regression of a gastric lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue after eradication of Helicobacter pylori in a kidney graft recipient.

Y. Le Meur,N. Pontoizeau-Potelune,A. Jaccard,F. Paraf,C. Leroux-Robert

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Removal of organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in sequential batch reactors integrating the aerobic/anaerobic processes.

N. Callado,E. Foresti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2166/WST.2001.0232

2001-08-01

Abstract:The performance of a bench-scale apparatus composed of two sequential batch reactors (SBR), forming an anaerobic/aerobic treatment system, was evaluated as to its potential use for biological removal of organic matter and nutrients. Both the reactors with 12.5 L of useful volume each were operated for the batch cycles of 12 hours receiving 8.0 L of substrate in each cycle. The first reactor (SBRAn) fed with synthetic substrate simulating domestic sewage was meant to remove the largest fraction of carbonic matter and to promote the substrate ammonification. The second reactor (SBRAe) was operated under alternating aerobic and anoxic conditions to establish conditions for achieving nitrification; denitrification and biological phosphate removal in the same batch cycle. Sodium acetate was used as an external carbon source for phosphate removal. Processes monitoring included the analyses of: COD, NTK-N, NH4(+)-N, NO2(-)-N, NO3(-)-N, PO4(3-)-P, alkalinity, volatile acids, pH, redox potential total, fixed and volatile solids. Under the operating conditions imposed, the system exhibited high performance in removing organic matter (COD), nitrogen and phosphorus, producing effluent with COD, NTK-N and PO4(3-)-P concentrations lower than 50.0 mg/L, 4.0 mg/L and 1.0 mg/L, respectively.
Intersectoral collaboration in the COVID-19 response in Latin America and the Caribbean

Donald T Simeon,Victor Cuba,Shelly-Ann Hunte,Kershelle Barker,Midori de Habich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-024-02233-0

2024-08-06

Abstract:World Health Organization (WHO) / Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) encouraged the utilization of whole-of-society and whole-of-government strategic approaches to increase countries' resilience towards mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies included the implementation of multi-sectoral, multi-partner and multi-stakeholder planning, coordination, consultation, and action. We reviewed the experiences of three Latin American and Caribbean countries, related to the implementation of collaborative strategies in tackling COVID-19, specifically the nature of the collaboration, the dynamics and the stakeholders involved.A systematic literature review identified relevant publications and content analysis was conducted to determine the collaborative strategies. Colombia, Costa Rica, and Trinidad and Tobago were selected as case studies since they were from different LAC subregions and because of the accessibility of relevant literature.In the three countries, the pandemic response was coordinated by a national executive committee, led by the Ministry of Health. Intersectoral collaboration was evident in each, with the key stakeholders being public sector agencies, the private/corporate sector, private/non-profit, academic institutions, and international agencies. It was used primarily to facilitate data-driven, evidenced-informed decision-making and guidelines; to expand clinical care capacity and strengthen the national medical response; and to provide support for the most vulnerable populations.While the institutionalization of intersectoral collaboration can be recommended for the health sector beyond the pandemic, research is needed to evaluate the impact of specific collaborative strategies as well as barriers and facilitators.
Getting trustworthy guidelines into the hands of decision-makers and supporting their consideration of contextual factors for implementation globally: recommendation mapping of COVID-19 guidelines

Tamara Lotfi,Adrienne Stevens,Elie A Akl,Maicon Falavigna,Tamara Kredo,Joseph L Mathew,Holger J Schünemann,eCOVID Collaborators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.034

Abstract:Published research on COVID-19 is increasing rapidly and integrated in guidelines. The trustworthiness of guidelines can vary depending on the methods used to assemble and evaluate the evidence, the completeness and transparency of reporting on the process undertaken and how conflicts of interest are addressed. With a global consortium of partners and collaborators, we have created a catalogue of COVID-19 recommendations as our direct response to the increased need for structured access to high quality guidance in the field. The COVID19 map of recommendations and gateway to contextualization (https://covid19.recmap.org) is a living project: emerging guideline literature is added on an ongoing basis, allowing granular access to individual recommendations. Building on prior work on mapping recommendations for the World Health Organization tuberculosis guidelines, a novel feature of this map is the self-directed contextualization of the recommendations using the GRADE-Adolopment approach to adopt, adapt or synthesize de novo recommendations for context specific questions. Through our map, stakeholders access the evidence underpinning a recommendation, select what needs to be contextualized and go through the steps of development of adapted recommendations. This one-stop shop portal of evidence-informed recommendations, built with intuitive functionalities, easy to navigate and with a support team ready to guide users across the maps, represents a long-needed tool for decision-makers, guideline developers and the public at large.
Health system adaptions to improve care for people living with non-communicable diseases during COVID-19 in low-middle income countries: A scoping review

Leonard Baatiema,Olutobi A Sanuade,Luke N Allen,Seye Abimbola,Celestin Hategeka,Kwadwo A Koram,Margaret E Kruk

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.13.06006

2023-03-03

Abstract:Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, access to health care for people living with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) has been significantly disrupted. Calls have been made to adapt health systems and innovate service delivery models to improve access to care. We identified and summarized the health systems adaptions and interventions implemented to improve NCD care and their potential impact on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We comprehensively searched Medline/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, Global Literature on coronavirus disease, and Web of Science for relevant literature published between January 2020 and December 2021. While we targeted articles written in English, we also included papers published in French with abstracts written in English. Results: After screening 1313 records, we included 14 papers from six countries. We identified four unique health systems adaptations/interventions for restoring, maintaining, and ensuring continuity of care for people living with NCDs: telemedicine or teleconsultation strategies, NCD medicine drop-off points, decentralization of hypertension follow-up services and provision of free medication to peripheral health centers, and diabetic retinopathy screening with a handheld smartphone-based retinal camera. We found that the adaptations/interventions enhanced continuity of NCD care during the pandemic and helped bring health care closer to patients using technology and easing access to medicines and routine visits. Telephonic aftercare services appear to have saved a significant amount of patients' time and funds. Hypertensive patients recorded better blood pressure controls over the follow-up period. Conclusions: Although the identified measures and interventions for adapting health systems resulted in potential improvements in access to NCD care and better clinical outcomes, further exploration is needed to establish the feasibility of these adaptations/interventions in different settings given the importance of context in their successful implementation. Insights from such implementation studies are critical for ongoing health systems strengthening efforts to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 and future global health security threats for people living with NCDs.
Readiness of primary care centres for a community-based intervention to prevent and control noncommunicable diseases in the Caribbean: A participatory, mixed-methods study

Reeta Gobin,Troy Thomas,Sharlene Goberdhan,Manoj Sharma,Robert Nasiiro,Rosana Emmanuel,Madan Rambaran,Shelly McFarlane,Christelle Elia,Davon Van-Veen,Ishtar Govia,Tiffany Palmer,Ursula Read,J. Kennedy Cruickshank,T. Alafia Samuels,Rainford Wilks,Seeromanie Harding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301503

IF: 3.7

2024-04-29

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Introduction Epidemiological transition to NCDs is a challenge for fragile health systems in the Caribbean. The Congregations Taking Action against NCDs (CONTACT) Study intervention proposes that trained health advocates (HAs) from places of worship (PoWs), supervised by nurses at nearby primary healthcare centres (PHCs), could facilitate access to primary care among vulnerable communities. Drawing on participatory and systems thinking, we explored the capacity of local PHCs in three Caribbean countries to support this intervention. Methods Communities in Jamaica (rural, urban), Guyana (rural) and Dominica (Indigenous Kalinago Territory) were selected for CONTACT because of their differing socio-economic, cultural, religious and health system contexts. Through mixed-method concept mapping, we co-developed a list of perceived actionable priorities (possible intervention points ranked highly for feasibility and importance) with 48 policy actors, healthcare practitioners and civic society representatives. Guided in part by the concept mapping findings, we assessed the readiness of 12 purposefully selected PHCs for the intervention, using a staff questionnaire and an observation checklist to identify enablers and constrainers. Results Concept mapping illustrated stakeholder optimism for the intervention, but revealed perceptions of inadequate primary healthcare service capacity, resources and staff training to support implementation. Readiness assessments of PHCs identified potential enablers and constrainers that were consistent with concept mapping results. Staff support was evident. Constraints included under-staffing, which could hinder supervision of HAs; and inadequate essential NCD medicines, training in NCDs and financial and policy support for embedding community interventions. Despite a history of socio-political disadvantage, the most enabling context was found in the Kalinago Territory, where ongoing community engagement activities could support joint development of programmes between churches and PHCs. Conclusion Multi-sectoral stakeholder consultation and direct PHC assessments revealed viability of the proposed POW-PHC partnership for NCD prevention and control. However, structural and policy support will be key for implementing change.

multidisciplinary sciences
Disruption of diabetes and hypertension care during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery approaches in the Latin America and Caribbean region: a scoping review protocol

Jabakhanji,S. B.,Ogungbe,O.,Angell,S. Y.,Appel,L.,Byrne,D.,Mehta,R.,McCaffrey,J.,Rosman,L.,Gregg,E. W.,Matsushita,K.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074443

IF: 3.006

2024-01-23

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted primary healthcare globally, with particular impacts on diabetes and hypertension care. This review will examine the impact of pandemic disruptions of diabetes and hypertension care services and the evidence for interventions to mitigate or reverse pandemic disruptions in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region. Methods and analyses This scoping review will examine care delivery disruption and approaches for recovery of primary healthcare in the LAC region during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on diabetes and hypertension awareness, detection, treatment and control. Guided by Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology framework, this protocol adheres to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping review protocols and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance for protocol development and scoping reviews. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Global Health, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS for peer-reviewed literature published from 2020 to 12 December 2022 in English, Spanish or Portuguese. Studies will be considered eligible if reporting data on pandemic disruptions to primary care services within LAC, or interventions implemented to mitigate or reverse pandemic disruptions globally. Studies on COVID-19 or acute care will be excluded. Two reviewers will independently screen each title/abstract for eligibility, screen full texts of titles/abstracts deemed relevant and extract data from eligible full-text publications. Conflicts will be resolved through discussion and with the help of a third reviewer. Appropriate analytical techniques will be employed to synthesise the data, for example, frequency counts and descriptive statistics. Quality will be assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval was needed as this is a scoping review of published literature. Results will be disseminated in a report to the World Bank and the Pan American Health Organization, in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and at national and international conferences.

medicine, general & internal
Methodology for adaptation of the ASH Guidelines for Management of Venous Thromboembolism for the Latin American context

Ignacio Neumann,Ariel Izcovich,Kendall E Alexander,Jenny Castano,Robert Plovnick,Robert Kunkle,Yuan Zhang,Ricardo Aguilar,Guillermo León Basantes,Patricia Casais,Cecilia C Colorio,María Cecilia Guillermo Esposito,Pedro P García Lázaro,Jaime Pereira,Luis A Meillon-García,Suely Meireles Rezende,Juan Carlos Serrano,Mario L Tejerina Valle,Holger Schünemann,Kendall E. Alexander,Cecilia C. Colorio,Pedro P. García Lázaro,Luis A. Meillon-García,Mario L. Tejerina Valle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2021004268

IF: 7.642

2021-08-10

Blood Advances

Abstract:Abstract Background: From 2017 to 2020, the American Society of Hematology (ASH) collaborated with 12 hematology societies in Latin America to adapt the ASH guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: To describe the methods used to adapt the ASH guidelines on venous thromboembolism. Methods: Each society nominated 1 individual to serve on the guideline panel. The work of the panel was facilitated by the 2 methodologists. The methods team selected 4 of the original VTE guidelines for a first round. To select the most relevant questions, a 2-step prioritization process was conducted through an on-line survey and then through in-person discussion. During an in-person meeting in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 23 April through 26 April 2018, the panel developed recommendations using the ADOLOPMENT approach. Evidence about health effects from the original guidelines was reused, but important data about resource use, accessibility, feasibility, and impact in health equity were added. Results: In the guideline accompanying this paper, Latin American panelists selected 17 questions from an original pool of 49. Of the 17 questions addressed, substantial changes were introduced for 5 recommendations, and remarks were added or modified for 12 recommendations. Conclusions: By using the evidence from an international guideline, a significant amount of work and time were saved; by adding regional evidence, the final recommendations were tailored to the Latin American context. This experience offers an alternative to develop guidelines relevant to local contexts through a global collaboration.

hematology
Surgical Treatment of Metastatic Spine Disease

K. Hammerberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199210000-00004

IF: 3.241

1992-10-01

Spine

Abstract:The results of surgical intervention for metastatic disease on 56 consecutive patients since 1980 were reviewed. Two patients underwent a second procedure to stabilize remote levels of spinal involvement, for a total of 58 surgeries. All 56 patients presented with pain. After surgery, significant relief was noted by 51 (91%). Twenty-seven patients presented with neurologic compromise. After operation, neurologic improvement was noted in 20 (74%). No patient's neurologic function deteriorated secondary to surgical intervention. Twenty-one patients were bedridden before surgery secondary to pain or paresis. After operation, improvement in activity level was achieved in 16 (76%) of these patients. In summary, the goal of surgical treatment of metastatic spine disease is to improve the quality of the remaining life, by the relief of pain and preservation or restoration of neurologic function. The dismal consequences of prolonged bed rest, paraplegia, and a painful premature demise can be avoided with thoughtful and timely surgical intervention.
Pharmacovigilance in the Caribbean Countries: an Overview

Kingsley E.W. Walker,Reshma Bankay,Satish Jankie,Sameer Dhingra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40495-023-00320-4

2023-05-18

Current Pharmacology Reports

Abstract:The constant surge in accessing essential medicines creates a greater need for continuous monitoring of usage. The inability to source active pharmaceutical ingredients during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in drug shortages that increased online requests for medications. E-commerce and social sites have opened the floodgate for the marketing of falsified, substandard, and unregistered pharmaceuticals, making them easily accessible to consumers with the click of a button. A high prevalence of such products with compromised quality highlights further the need for enhanced post-marketing vigilance of safety and quality within the pharmaceutical industry. This review aims to assess the extent to which pharmacovigilance (PV) systems in selected Caribbean countries conform to the minimum World Health Organization (WHO) requirements, highlight the importance of PV in ensuring the safer use of medicines across the Caribbean region, and identify opportunities and challenges in building comprehensive PV systems.
Building sustainable capacity to adopt, adapt or develop child health guidelines, Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa

Tamara Kredo,Solange Durão,Emmanuel Effa,Celeste Naude,Michael McCaul,Amanda Brand,Simon Lewin,Claire Glenton,Susan Munabi-Babigumira,Elodie Besnier,Trudy D Leong,Bey-Marie Schmidt,Nyanyiwe Mbeye,Ameer Hohlfeld,Anke Rohwer,Tandekile Lubelwana Hafver,Nicolas Delvaux,Lungiswa Nkonki,Funeka Bango,Emma Thompson,Sara Cooper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.24.291564

2024-10-01

Abstract:Problem: Many national child health guidelines in Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa are outdated and score poorly on rigorous methods and stakeholder participation. Approach: In line with the World Health Organization's (WHO) emphasis on local guideline contextualization, the Global Evidence-Local Adaptation (GELA) project supported multistakeholder processes to adapt evidence-informed recommendations for child health in Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa. The GELA project team convened national steering groups, which conducted structured, iterative priority-setting exercises to identify priority topics. We identified appropriate source guidelines by systematically searching and screening available guidelines. We then matched recommendations in potential source guidelines to the relevant questions, and assessed the guidelines for timeliness and quality. Drawing on WHO's guideline process, we applied the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT process to develop contextualized recommendations from existing guidelines. If no source guideline or reviews were identified, we conducted new evidence syntheses. Local setting: Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa are countries with varying health priorities and systems, all transitioning to universal health coverage. Guideline structures differ between countries, with processes largely led from national health ministries. Relevant changes: National guideline groups, supported by GELA researchers and government-academic partners, developed five contextually-tailored child health recommendations. For most of these recommendations, additional evidence was required to inform contextually appropriate national decision-making. Formal capacity-building and on-the-job learning enhanced the competencies of national contributors and researchers in evidence-informed decision-making. Lessons learnt: Developing context-relevant recommendations requires considerable resources and time. Further investment in strengthening local capacity is needed for sustainable national guideline development.
Strengthening guideline contextualization in the WHO European Region

Marge Reinap,Naomi Limaro Nathan,Natasha Azzopardi Muscat,Kaja-Triin Laisaar,Urmeli Katus,Holger J Schünemann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.24.291779

2024-10-01

Abstract:The World Health Organization (WHO) plays an important role in developing evidence-based and ethically sound guidelines to assist health workers, programme managers and policy-makers, particularly in countries with limited capacities to create their own. While the development of these guidelines follows rigorous methods, contextualizing recommendations is often necessary to ensure their applicability, feasibility and acceptability at the country level. The adaptation and adoption of global guidelines should happen in a transparent, systematic and participatory manner to maintain credibility while ensuring the ownership necessary for implementation. Here, we present an example from Estonia that showcases the process, requirements and outcomes of implementing WHO guidelines through effective contextualization. The work in Estonia showed that contextualization can shorten guideline development time and reduce costs. To support countries in contextualizing guidelines, including those developed by WHO, to local contexts while maintaining trustworthiness and relevance, the WHO Regional Office for Europe has developed a handbook based on the GRADE-Adolopment approach to guide this process. Furthermore, a rapid assessment of 21 of the 53 Member States in the WHO European Region revealed that many countries need guidance and support to build capacity for contextualizing guidelines. To address the capacity gaps, we suggest a way forward that encompasses four areas of further work: standardizing methods; institutionalizing guideline programmes and initiatives; promoting continuous and shared learning; and providing support and identifying resources. Strengthening countries' capacities to contextualize global guidelines is crucial and will become especially relevant during future health threats, such as pandemics, climate change and conflict situations.
Barriers to and facilitators of living guidelines use in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

Bekele Tesfaye Meteku,Matthew Quigley,Tari Turner,Sally E Green

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074311

IF: 3.006

2024-01-18

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction Living guidelines provide reliable, ongoing evidence surveillance and regularly updated recommendations for healthcare decision-making. As a relatively new concept, most of the initial application of living approaches has been undertaken in high-income countries. However, in this scoping review, we looked at what is currently known about how living guidelines were developed, used and applied in low-income and middle-income countries. Methods Searches for published literature were conducted in Medline, Global Health, Cochrane Library and Embase. Grey literature was identified using Google Scholar and the WHO website. In addition, the reference lists of included studies were checked for missing studies. Studies were included if they described or reflected on the development, application or utility of living guideline approaches for low-income and middle-income countries. Results After a full-text review, 21 studies were included in the review, reporting on the development and application of living recommendations in low-income and middle-income countries. Most studies reported living guideline activities conducted by the WHO (15, 71.4%), followed by China (4, 19%), Chile (1, 4.8%) and Lebanon (1, 4.8%). All studies based on WHO reports relate to living COVID-19 management guidelines. Conclusions Most of the studies in this review were WHO-reported studies focusing solely on COVID-19 disease treatment living guidelines. However, there was no clear explanation of how living guidelines were used nor information on the prospects for and obstacles to the implementation of living guidelines in low-income and middle-income countries.

medicine, general & internal
Clinical practice guidelines: Their utility, dissemination and monitoring at Colonial War Memorial Hospital: A mixed methods study from Fiji

Ashnita A. Krishna,Sinead Kado,Alok Dubey,Cameron Grant,Joseph Kado

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.16349

2024-02-25

Internal Medicine Journal

Abstract:Background Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) improve patient care by standardising medical practice. However, little is known about their applicability in low‐resource settings. Since 2010, Fiji has introduced guidelines to increase the application of evidence‐based practice. Aims We describe the dissemination, utility and monitoring of guideline implementation in Fiji, a low‐resource setting in the Pacific. Methods A mixed‐methods design included a survey and focus groups. All 178 doctors in five departments at Fiji's largest tertiary hospital were invited to participate. Subsequently, two focus group interviews explored clinicians' perspectives in more detail. Analysis included data description, multi‐variable logistic, multinomial regression and manifest content analyses. Results The response rate was 74%. Most doctors agreed that CPGs were good for patient management (100%), doctors continuing medical education (CME) (96%), patient education (73%), supported by systematic reviews (91%) and consistent with existing norms/values (83%). Ninety‐five per cent stated that CPGs increased the quality of care, and 80% stated that CPGs increased physician satisfaction. Approximately two‐thirds stated that CPGs decreased medical‐legal problems (63%) and malpractice suits (68%). Sixty to 90% of doctors disagreed that CPGs were oversimplified/cookbook medicine (60%), too rigid to apply individually (65%), challenged physician autonomy (60%) or were ambiguous/unclear (86%) or not practical (89%). The preferred method of dissemination was CME, and quick reference guides were best for implementation. No formal CPG monitoring existed in any department. Conclusion Most physicians found CPGs to be valuable for improving the consistency of care. In low‐resource settings, dissemination of guidelines should be paired with CME to improve their uptake. Increased monitoring of guideline use appears necessary.

medicine, general & internal
Pan-American Guidelines for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: a joint evidence-based guideline of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API)

Alexandre Naime Barbosa,Alberto Chebabo,Carlos Starling,Clevy Pérez,Clóvis Arns Cunha,David de Luna,Estevão Portela Nunes,Gabriela Zambrano,Juliana Carvalho Ferreira,Julio Croda,Maicon Falavigna,Monica Maria Gomes-da-Silva,Monica Thormann,Sergio Cimerman,Suena Medeiros Parahiba,Suzana Tanni,Wanderley Marques Bernardo,Alfonso J Rodriguez-Morales

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-023-00623-w

2023-08-07

Abstract:Background: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, therapeutic options for treating COVID-19 have been investigated at different stages of clinical manifestations. Considering the particular impact of COVID-19 in the Americas, this document aims to present recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 specific to this population. Methods: Fifteen experts, members of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API) make up the panel responsible for developing this guideline. Questions were formulated regarding prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 in outpatient and inpatient settings. The outcomes considered in decision-making were mortality, hospitalisation, need for mechanical ventilation, symptomatic COVID-19 episodes, and adverse events. In addition, a systematic review of randomised controlled trials was conducted. The quality of evidence assessment and guideline development process followed the GRADE system. Results: Nine technologies were evaluated, and ten recommendations were made, including the use of tixagevimab + cilgavimab in the prophylaxis of COVID-19, tixagevimab + cilgavimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir + ritonavir, and remdesivir in the treatment of outpatients, and remdesivir, baricitinib, and tocilizumab in the treatment of hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19. The use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine and ivermectin was discouraged. Conclusion: This guideline provides recommendations for treating patients in the Americas following the principles of evidence-based medicine. The recommendations present a set of drugs that have proven effective in the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19, emphasising the strong recommendation for the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in outpatients as the lack of benefit from the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
International alliance and AGREE-ment of 71 clinical practice guidelines on the management of critical care patients with COVID-19: a living systematic review

Yasser S Amer,Maher A Titi,Mohammad W Godah,Hayfaa A Wahabi,Layal Hneiny,Manal Mohamed Abouelkheir,Muddathir H Hamad,Ghada Metwally ElGohary,Mohamed Ben Hamouda,Hella Ouertatani,Pamela Velasquez-Salazar,Jorge Acosta-Reyes,Samia M Alhabib,Samia Ahmed Esmaeil,Zbys Fedorowicz,Ailing Zhang,Zhe Chen,Sarah Jayne Liptrott,Niccolò Frungillo,Amr A Jamal,Sami A Almustanyir,Newman Ugochukwu Dieyi,John Powell,Katrina J Hon,Rasmieh Alzeidan,Majduldeen Azzo,Sara Zambrano-Rico,Paulina Ramirez-Jaramillo,Ivan D Florez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.11.010

Abstract:Objective: We aimed to systematically identify and critically assess the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 with the AGREE II instrument. Study design and setting: We searched Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, CNKI, CBM, WanFang, and grey literature from November 2019 - November 2020. We did not apply language restrictions. One reviewer independently screened the retrieved titles and abstracts, and a second reviewer confirmed the decisions. Full texts were assessed independently and in duplicate. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. We included any guideline that provided recommendations on the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Data extraction was performed independently and in duplicate by two reviewers. We descriptively summarized CPGs characteristics. We assessed the quality with the AGREE II instrument and we summarized relevant therapeutic interventions. Results: We retrieved 3,907 records and 71 CPGs were included. Means (Standard Deviations) of the scores for the 6 domains of the AGREE II instrument were 65%(SD19.56%), 39%(SD19.64%), 27%(SD19.48%), 70%(SD15.74%), 26%(SD18.49%), 42%(SD34.91) for the scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence domains, respectively. Most of the CPGs showed a low overall quality (less than 40%). Conclusion: Future CPGs for COVID-19 need to rely, for their development, on standard evidence-based methods and tools.
2021 World Health Organization guideline on pharmacological treatment of hypertension: Policy implications for the region of the Americas

Norm R.C. Campbell,Melanie Paccot Burnens,Paul K. Whelton,Sonia Y. Angell,Marc G. Jaffe,Jennifer Cohn,Alfredo Espinosa Brito,Vilma Irazola,Jeffrey W. Brettler,Edward J. Roccella,Javier Isaac Maldonado Figueredo,Andres Rosende,Pedro Ordunez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2022.100219

2022-05-01

Abstract:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in the Americas and raised blood pressure accounts for over 50% of CVD. In the Americas over a quarter of adult women and four in ten adult men have hypertension and the diagnosis, treatment and control are suboptimal. In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) released an updated guideline for the pharmacological treatment of hypertension in adults. This policy paper highlights the facilitating role of the WHO Global HEARTS initiative and the HEARTS in the Americas initiative to catalyze the implementation of this guideline, provides specific policy advice for implementation, and emphasizes that an overarching strategic approach for hypertension control is needed. The authors urge health advocates and policymakers to prioritize the prevention and control of hypertension to improve the health and wellbeing of their populations and to reduce CVD health disparities within and between populations of the Americas.
Adapting evidence-informed population health interventions for new contexts: a scoping review of current practice

A. Movsisyan,L. Arnold,L. Copeland,R. Evans,H. Littlecott,G. Moore,A. O’Cathain,L. Pfadenhauer,J. Segrott,E. Rehfuess

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00668-9

2021-02-05

Health Research Policy and Systems

Abstract:Abstract Background Implementing evidence-informed population health interventions in new contexts often requires adaptations. While the need to adapt interventions to better fit new contexts is recognised, uncertainties remain regarding why and when to adapt (or not), and how to assess the benefits (or not) of adaptation. The ADAPT Study aims to develop comprehensive guidance on adaptation. This scoping review informs guidance development by mapping and exploring how adaptation has been undertaken in practice, in public health and health services research. Methods We searched seven databases from January 2000 and October 2018 to identify eligible studies for this scoping review and a related systematic review of adaptation guidance. We mapped the studies of adaptation by coding data from all eligible studies describing the methods, contexts, and interventions considered for adaptation. From this map, we selected a sample of studies for in-depth examination. Two reviewers extracted data independently into seven categories: description, key concepts, types, rationale, processes, evaluation methods, evaluation justification, and accounts of failures and successes. Results We retrieved 6694 unique records. From 429 records screened at full text, we identified 298 eligible studies for mapping and selected 28 studies for in-depth examination. The majority of studies in our map focused on micro- (i.e., individual-) level interventions (84%), related to transferring an intervention to a new population group within the same country (62%) and did not report using guidance (73%). Studies covered a range of topic areas, including health behaviour (24%), mental health (19%), sexual health (16%), and parenting and family-centred interventions (15%). Our in-depth analysis showed that adaptation is seen to save costs and time relative to developing a new intervention, and to enhance contextual relevance and cultural compatibility. It commonly follows a structured process and involves stakeholders to help with decisions on what to adapt, when, and how. Conclusions Adaptation has been undertaken on a range of health topics and largely in line with existing guidance. Significant gaps relate to adaptation of macro- (e.g., national-) level interventions, consideration of programme theories, mechanisms and contexts (i.e., a functional view of interventions), nuances around stakeholder involvement, and evaluation of the adapted interventions. Registration Open Science Framework, 2019, osf.io/udzma.

health policy & services
Comparison of WHO versus national COVID-19 therapeutic guidelines across the world: not exactly a perfect match

Mia Cokljat,Cintia Valeria Cruz,Verena Ilona Carrara,Kanoktip Puttaraska,Camila Capriglioni,Sabrina Marcela Insaurralde,Maximo Rousseau-Portalis,Agustina Roldan,James A Watson,Joel Tarning,Nicholas J White,Philippe J Guerin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014188

IF: 8.056

2024-04-01

BMJ Global Health

Abstract:Background The COVID-19 pandemic affected all WHO member states. We compared and contrasted the COVID-19 treatment guidelines of each member state with the WHO COVID-19 therapeutic guidelines. Methods Ministries of Health or accessed National Infectious Disease websites and other relevant bodies and experts were contacted to obtain national guidelines (NGs) for COVID-19 treatment. NGs were included only if they delineated specific pharmacological treatments for COVID-19, which were stratified by disease severity. We conducted a retrospective review using the adapted Reporting Checklist for Public Versions of Guidelines (RIGHT-PVG) survey checklist and a derived comparative metric based on the WHO guidelines was performed. Results COVID-19 therapeutics NGs could be obtained from 109 of the 194 WHO member states. There was considerable variation in guidelines and in disease severity stratifications. Therapeutic recommendations in many NGs differed substantially from the WHO guidelines. Overall in late 2022, 93% of NGs were recommending at least one treatment which had proved to be ineffective in large randomised trials, and was not recommended by WHO. Corticosteroids were not recommended in severe disease in nearly 10% of NGs despite overwhelming evidence of their benefit. NGs from countries with low-resource settings showed the greatest divergence when stratified by gross domestic product per year, Human Development Index and the Global Health Security Index. Discussion Our study is limited to NGs that were readily accessible, and it does not reflect the availability of recommended medicines in the field. Three years after the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, available COVID-19 NGs vary substantially in their therapeutic recommendations, often differ from the WHO guidelines, and commonly recommend ineffective, unaffordable or unavailable medicines.

public, environmental & occupational health
"Going into the black box": a policy analysis of how the World Health Organization uses evidence to inform guideline recommendations

Heather Ingold,Gabriela B. Gomez,David Stuckler,Anna Vassall,Mitzy Gafos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1292475

IF: 5.2

2024-03-22

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) plays a crucial role in producing global guidelines. In response to previous criticism, WHO has made efforts to enhance the process of guideline development, aiming for greater systematicity and transparency. However, it remains unclear whether these changes have effectively addressed these earlier critiques. This paper examines the policy process employed by WHO to inform guideline recommendations, using the update of the WHO Consolidated HIV Testing Services (HTS) Guidelines as a case study. Methods: We observed guideline development meetings and conducted semi-structured interviews with key participants involved in the WHO guideline-making process. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. The data were deductively coded and analysed in line with the main themes from a published conceptual framework for context-based evidence-based decision making: introduction, interpretation, and application of evidence. Results: The HTS guideline update was characterized by an inclusive and transparent process, involving a wide range of stakeholders. However, it was noted that not all stakeholders could participate equally due to gaps in training and preparation, particularly regarding the complexity of the Grading Recommendations Assessment Development Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We also found that WHO does not set priorities for which or how many guidelines should be produced each year and does not systematically evaluate the implementation of their recommendations. Our interviews revealed disconnects in the evidence synthesis process, starting from the development of systematic review protocols. While GRADE prioritizes evidence from RCTs, the Guideline Development Group (GDG) heavily emphasized "other" GRADE domains for which little or no evidence was available from the systematic reviews. As a result, expert judgements and opinions played a role in making recommendations. Finally, the role of donors and their presence as observers during GDG meetings was not clearly defined. Conclusion: We found a need for a different approach to evidence synthesis due to the diverse range of global guidelines produced by WHO. Ideally, the evidence synthesis should be broad enough to capture evidence from different types of studies for all domains in the GRADE framework. Greater structure is required in formulating GDGs and clarifying the role of donors through the process.

public, environmental & occupational health
Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients With COVID-19 (September 2022)

Adarsh Bhimraj,Rebecca L Morgan,Amy Hirsch Shumaker,Lindsey R Baden,Vincent Chi-Chung Cheng,Kathryn M Edwards,Jason C Gallagher,Rajesh T Gandhi,William J Muller,Mari M Nakamura,John C O'Horo,Robert W Shafer,Shmuel Shoham,M Hassan Murad,Reem A Mustafa,Shahnaz Sultan,Yngve Falck-Ytter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciac724

2024-06-27

Abstract:There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with rapidly changing efficacy and safety evidence from trials. The objective was to develop evidence-based, rapid, living guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians, and other healthcare professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. In March 2020, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise to regularly review the evidence and make recommendations about the treatment and management of persons with COVID-19. The process used a living guideline approach and followed a rapid recommendation development checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. A systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted at regular intervals. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Based on the most recent search conducted on 31 May 2022, the IDSA guideline panel has made 32 recommendations for the treatment and management of the following groups/populations: pre- and postexposure prophylaxis, ambulatory with mild-to-moderate disease, and hospitalized with mild-to-moderate, severe but not critical, and critical disease. As these are living guidelines, the most recent recommendations can be found online at: https://idsociety.org/COVID19guidelines. At the inception of its work, the panel has expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials. Since then, many trials were conducted that provided much-needed evidence for COVID-19 therapies. There still remain many unanswered questions as the pandemic evolved, which we hope future trials can answer.

Regression of a gastric lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue after eradication of Helicobacter pylori in a kidney graft recipient.

Removal of organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in sequential batch reactors integrating the aerobic/anaerobic processes.

Intersectoral collaboration in the COVID-19 response in Latin America and the Caribbean

Getting trustworthy guidelines into the hands of decision-makers and supporting their consideration of contextual factors for implementation globally: recommendation mapping of COVID-19 guidelines

Health system adaptions to improve care for people living with non-communicable diseases during COVID-19 in low-middle income countries: A scoping review

Readiness of primary care centres for a community-based intervention to prevent and control noncommunicable diseases in the Caribbean: A participatory, mixed-methods study

Disruption of diabetes and hypertension care during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery approaches in the Latin America and Caribbean region: a scoping review protocol

Methodology for adaptation of the ASH Guidelines for Management of Venous Thromboembolism for the Latin American context

Surgical Treatment of Metastatic Spine Disease

Pharmacovigilance in the Caribbean Countries: an Overview

Building sustainable capacity to adopt, adapt or develop child health guidelines, Malawi, Nigeria and South Africa

Strengthening guideline contextualization in the WHO European Region

Barriers to and facilitators of living guidelines use in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

Clinical practice guidelines: Their utility, dissemination and monitoring at Colonial War Memorial Hospital: A mixed methods study from Fiji

Pan-American Guidelines for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: a joint evidence-based guideline of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API)

International alliance and AGREE-ment of 71 clinical practice guidelines on the management of critical care patients with COVID-19: a living systematic review

2021 World Health Organization guideline on pharmacological treatment of hypertension: Policy implications for the region of the Americas

Adapting evidence-informed population health interventions for new contexts: a scoping review of current practice

Comparison of WHO versus national COVID-19 therapeutic guidelines across the world: not exactly a perfect match

"Going into the black box": a policy analysis of how the World Health Organization uses evidence to inform guideline recommendations

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients With COVID-19 (September 2022)