OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the development and quality of actionable statements that qualify as good practice statements (GPS) reported in COVID-19 guidelines. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review . We searched MEDLINE, MedSci, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), databases of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Guidelines, NICE, WHO and Guidelines International Network (GIN) from March 2020 to September 2021. We included original or adapted recommendations addressing any COVID-19 topic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used GRADE Working Group criteria for assessing the appropriateness of issuing a GPS: (1) clear and actionable; (2) rationale necessitating the message for healthcare practice; (3) practicality of systematically searching for evidence; (4) likely net positive consequences from implementing the GPS and (5) clear link to the indirect evidence. We assessed guideline quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. RESULTS: 253 guidelines from 44 professional societies issued 3726 actionable statements. We classified 2375 (64%) as GPS; of which 27 (1%) were labelled as GPS by guideline developers. 5 (19%) were labelled as GPS by their authors but did not meet GPS criteria. Of the 2375 GPS, 85% were clear and actionable; 59% provided a rationale necessitating the message for healthcare practice, 24% reported the net positive consequences from implementing the GPS. Systematic collection of evidence was deemed impractical for 13% of the GPS, and 39% explained the chain of indirect evidence supporting GPS development. 173/2375 (7.3%) statements explicitly satisfied all five criteria. The guidelines' overall quality was poor regardless of the appropriateness of GPS development and labelling. CONCLUSIONS: Statements that qualify as GPS are common in COVID-19 guidelines but are characterised by unclear designation and development processes, and methodological weaknesses.

• MeSH
• COVID-19 * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• systematický přehled MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Čína MeSH

BACKGROUND: Consensus on evidence-based practice (EBP) competencies and associated learning outcomes for registered nurses has not yet been achieved in the European context. AIMS: To establish a set of core EBP competencies for nurses and the most important EBP learning outcomes encompassing attitudes, knowledge, and skills dimensions for implementation into nursing education in European countries. METHODS: A multi-phase modified Delphi survey was conducted: Phase 1, a literature review; Phase 2, a two-round consensus of experts; and Phase 3, a Delphi survey. Experts from six European countries participated. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 88 records were selected and 835 statements extracted, which were grouped according to the seven steps of EBP. After removing 157 duplicates, the remaining competencies (n = 678) were evaluated in Phase 2. Then, a two-round expert consensus was reached, with 24 competencies and 120 learning outcomes identified and divided into affective, cognitive, and skills domains. In Phase 3, based on a Delphi survey expert consensus, all evaluated statements were included in a final set of competencies and learning outcomes. Only two learning outcomes were recommended for allocation to a different domain, and four were reformulated as suggested, with no further changes to the others. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: The set of EBP competencies and learning outcomes can guide nurse educators, managers, and EBP stakeholders in the development of content that incorporates EBP knowledge, skills, and attitudes into educational programs. Prioritizing the EBP competencies and learning outcomes that are most necessary and adapting them to every context will provide healthcare organizations with guidelines for enhancing the continuing education of nurses. These results could facilitate the development of effective tools for assessing nursing students' and nurses' perception of competencies required for EBP processes.

• MeSH
• delfská metoda MeSH
• klinické kompetence normy   MeSH
• konsensus MeSH
• lékařská praxe založená na důkazech metody   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
• vyučování psychologie   normy   MeSH
• zdravotní sestry psychologie   statistika a číselné údaje   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Evropa MeSH

Background: In this work, we aimed to establish a clinical target in the management of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and to propose good clinical practice (GCP) statements for carrying out a treat-to-target strategy. Methods: A steering committee of seven experts had formulated a provisional set of recommendations that were exposed for discussion and modification to a technical expert panel (TEP) of 25 multidisciplinary experts from Europe, North America, South America and Asia. The level of evidence and strength of each recommendation was discussed. The TEP formulated overarching principles and GCP statements based on the level of agreement for each item with a vote using a 10-point numerical scale. Results: Two overarching principles and 10 GCP statements were formulated by the TEP. These GCP statements suggest: treatment should achieve clinical improvement bringing the patient to the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS); pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment should begin as early as possible, with an early diagnosis of symptomatic KOA; the patient should be evaluated every 3-6 months; risk factors of KOA progression should be identified and managed with patients at the beginning of the treatment and monitored regularly; treatment should be adapted according to patient phenotype and disease severity; healthy lifestyle must be promoted and monitored. The level of agreement average ranged from 8.7 to 9.6 on scale. Conclusions: The proposed overarching principles and GCP statements have the aim of involving patients, general practitioners and multidisciplinary specialists in sharing a therapeutic treat-to-target strategy for KOA management based on the best evidence and expert opinions.

• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

An evidence-based approach is considered the gold standard for health decision-making. Sometimes, a guideline panel might judge the certainty that the desirable effects of an intervention clearly outweigh its undesirable effects as high, but the body of supportive evidence is indirect. In such cases, the application of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach for grading the strength of recommendations is inappropriate. Instead, the GRADE Working Group has recommended developing ungraded best or good practice statement (GPS) and developed guidance under which circumsances they would be appropriate.Through an evaluation of COVID-1- related recommendations on the eCOVID Recommendation Map (COVID-19.recmap.org), we found that recommendations qualifying a GPS were widespread. However, guideline developers failed to label them as GPS or transparently report justifications for their development. We identified ways to improve and facilitate the operationalisation and implementation of the GRADE guidance for GPS.Herein, we propose a structured process for the development of GPSs that includes applying a sequential order for the GRADE guidance for developing GPS. This operationalisation considers relevant evidence-to-decision criteria when assessing the net consequences of implementing the statement, and reporting information supporting judgments for each criterion. We also propose a standardised table to facilitate the identification of GPS and reporting of their development. This operationalised guidance, if endorsed by guideline developers, may palliate some of the shortcomings identified. Our proposal may also inform future updates of the GRADE guidance for GPS.

• MeSH
• COVID-19 * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• medicína založená na důkazech * MeSH
• výzkumný projekt MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

Vytvoření Zásad dobré praxe je jedním z klíčových cílů projektu Dementia Palliare, který se uskutečňuje v rámci programu Erasmus+ (klíčová aktivita 2 – KA 2). Dementia Palliare je novým konceptem a snahou o pozitivní rozvoj v praxi a podporu lidí s pokročilou demencí, nikoli však přímo v terminálních stadiích demence. Projekt Palliare je zaměřen na interprofesionální spolupráci a vzdělávání v problematice pokročilé demence. Jeho cílem je poskytnout nové informace a mezinárodní zkušenosti nejen odborníkům, profesionálním pečujícím o osoby s demencí, ale i všem dalším, kteří mají o tuto problematiku zájem. To by mělo přispět nejen ke zlepšení péče o lidi s demencí v Evropě, ale i k lepší podpoře jejich rodinných pečujících a spolupráci mezi profesionály a všemi dalšími zúčastněnými. Zásady dobré praxe jako otevřený dokument tímto předkládáme k diskusi všem, kdo mají o danou problematiku zájem.

Dementia Palliare is a new concept of positive practice development regarding the support of a person with advanced but not end stage dementia, who has limited opportunities for self-realisation and is increasingly reliant on the support of others for their health and wellbeing. PALLIARE Project is funded by the ERASMUS+ Programme. The project aims to strengthen inter-professional collaboration in dementia care; this will be facilitated through a virtual international Community of Practice (CoP). This learning environment will bring together people with a common interest to share and learn from one another to champion evidence informed improvements in advanced dementia care and family caring. Palliare Project team is led by Professor Debbie Tolson PhD MSc BSc (Hons) RGN FRCN Alzheimer Scotland Centre for Policy and Practice at University of the West of Scotland. The PALLIARE team is made up from seven European countries: Scotland, Czech Republic, Spain, Finland, Sweden, Slovenia and Portugal.

• Klíčová slova
• projekt PALLIARE,
• MeSH
• demence * ošetřování   MeSH
• Evropská unie MeSH
• komunikace MeSH
• kvalita života MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• lidská práva MeSH
• ošetřovatelská péče metody   MeSH
• ošetřovatelství - vzorové postupy * MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• směrnice jako téma MeSH
• výzkumný projekt MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• senioři MeSH

OBJECTIVE: To propose a taxonomy and framework that identifies and presents actionable statements in guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We took an iterative approach reviewing case studies of guidelines produced by the World Health Organization and the American Society of Hematology to develop an initial conceptual framework. We then tested it using randomly selected recommendations from published guidelines addressing COVID-19 from different organizations, evaluated its results, and refined it before retesting. The urgency and availability of evidence for development of these recommendations varied. We consulted with experts in research methodology and guideline developers to improve the final framework. RESULTS: The resulting taxonomy and framework distinguishes five types of actional statements: formal recommendations; research recommendations; good practice statements; implementation considerations, tools and tips; and informal recommendations. These statements should respond to a priori established criteria and require a clear structure and recognizable presentation in a guideline. Most importantly, this framework identifies informal recommendations that differ from formal recommendations by how they consider evidence and in their development process. CONCLUSION: The identification, standardization and explicit labelling of actionable statements according to the framework may support guideline developers to create actionable statements with clear intent, avoid informal recommendations and improve their understanding and implementation by users.

• MeSH
• COVID-19 * epidemiologie   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• publikace MeSH
• Světová zdravotnická organizace MeSH
• výzkumný projekt MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.

• MeSH
• delfská metoda MeSH
• konsensus * MeSH
• lékařská onkologie metody   normy   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mezinárodní spolupráce MeSH
• močový měchýř patologie   MeSH
• nádory močového měchýře patologie   terapie   MeSH
• průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
• směrnice pro lékařskou praxi jako téma * MeSH
• společnosti lékařské normy   MeSH
• staging nádorů MeSH
• účast zainteresovaných stran MeSH
• urologie metody   normy   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Evropa MeSH

OBJECTIVES: The 2018 EAHP European Statements Survey focused on sections 1, 3 and 4 of the European Statements of Hospital Pharmacy. Statistical data on the level of implementation and on the main barriers to implementation of the Statements were collected. A further aim was to identify barriers in general, such as lack of awareness. METHODS: An online questionnaire was sent to all hospital pharmacies in EAHP member countries. Data were analysed at Keele University School of Pharmacy, UK. As with previous reports, the survey was divided into three sections: section A, asking general questions about the hospital pharmacy; Section B, addressing questions about the current activity of pharmacists around each statement from Sections 1, 3 and 4; and Section C, focusing on their ability to implement the statements. RESULTS: 719 complete responses were obtained from a sample of 5164 hospital pharmacies, giving a response rate of 14% (719/5164). Section A results indicated that 45% (323/719) of responders worked in teaching hospitals, 79% (568/719) of hospital pharmacies had 10 or fewer pharmacists, and 48% (345/719) of hospital pharmacies served over 500 beds. Section B results found a high percentage of positive responses for activity in section 1 (introductory statements and governance) and section 3 (production and compounding). However, responses to questions in section 4 (clinical pharmacy services) were more variable, with 6 of the 15 questions being answered positively by less than half of respondents. The five questions that revealed the lowest implementation levels were then analysed in greater detail. These questions corresponded to Statements 4.4, 4.5, 4.8, 1.1, and 4.2, which need the greatest effort for implementation. The major identified barriers to implementation were 'lack of capacity' and that 'other health professionals in the hospital fulfil the tasks'. CONCLUSIONS: This survey provides useful information on the implementation status (and the barriers to, and drivers of implementation) of sections 1, 3 and 4 of the Statements. This will allow the EAHP to plan its implementation support programme for its members. To increase the quality of data, as well as the feedback to hospital pharmacies, the EAHP is planning to combine the survey with the self-assessment tool of the European Statements of Hospital Pharmacy.

• MeSH
• farmaceuti MeSH
• farmacie * MeSH
• lékárny * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• nemocniční lékárny * MeSH
• průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

The European Best Practice Guideline group (EBPG) issued guidelines on the evaluation and selection of kidney donor and kidney transplant candidates, as well as post-transplant recipient care, in the year 2000 and 2002. The new European Renal Best Practice board decided in 2009 that these guidelines needed updating. In order to avoid duplication of efforts with kidney disease improving global outcomes, which published in 2009 clinical practice guidelines on the post-transplant care of kidney transplant recipients, we did not address these issues in the present guidelines.The guideline was developed following a rigorous methodological approach: (i) identification of clinical questions, (ii) prioritization of questions, (iii) systematic literature review and critical appraisal of available evidence and (iv) formulation of recommendations and grading according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The strength of each recommendation is rated 1 or 2, with 1 being a 'We recommend' statement, and 2 being a 'We suggest' statement. In addition, each statement is assigned an overall grade for the quality of evidence: A (high), B (moderate), C (low) or D (very low). The guideline makes recommendations for the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and perioperative recipient care.All together, the work group issued 112 statements. There were 51 (45%) recommendations graded '1', 18 (16%) were graded '2' and 43 (38%) statements were not graded. There were 0 (0%) recommendations graded '1A', 15 (13%) were '1B', 19 (17%) '1C' and 17 (15%) '1D'. None (0%) were graded '2A', 1 (0.9%) was '2B', 8 (7%) were '2C' and 9 (8%) '2D'. Limitations of the evidence, especially the lack of definitive clinical outcome trials, are discussed and suggestions are provided for future research.We present here the complete recommendations about the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and the perioperative recipient care. We hope that this document will help caregivers to improve the quality of care they deliver to patients. The full version with methods, rationale and references is published in Nephrol Dial Transplant (2013) 28: i1-i71; doi: 10.1093/ndt/gft218 and can be downloaded freely from http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/ndt/era_edta.html.

• MeSH
• dárci tkání * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• nemoci ledvin chirurgie   MeSH
• perioperační péče normy   MeSH
• příjemce transplantátu * MeSH
• transplantace ledvin normy   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• směrnice pro lékařskou praxi MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Evropa MeSH

BACKGROUND: There is limited insight into the current disease burden and everyday clinical management of moderate-to- severe AD in Poland, Czechia, Russia, and Turkiye. Therefore, this study aimed to get information-driven insights regarding the current disease burden and clinical management of patients with moderate-to-severe AD with common and differentiating aspects of the patient journey and establish a consensus. METHODS: In this modified 2-round Delphi panel, 133 questions were asked in total to 27 dermatologists. A consensus was achieved when 70% of the panel members strongly agreed or agreed (or strongly disagreed or disagreed) with an item. Statements with <40% agreement dropped from the Delphi rounds and were not repeated. RESULTS: The results state that AD has a significant impact on the quality of life for both patients and their families with social and economic consequences in these countries. While there were significant dissimilarities regarding the current treatment approach by preference order and treatment duration among participants, there was also a high percentage of consensus on literature and guideline-based statements. Current topical therapies and the immune response modifiers were not found to be sufficient by panelists to cover the therapeutic needs of patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Moreover, panelists highlighted the significant burden of adverse events with the off-label use of currently available immunosuppressants. CONCLUSIONS: These results underlined that there is a significant disease burden with an unmet treatment need for patients with moderate-to-severe AD in Poland, Czechia, Russia, and Turkiye.

• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH