ESI Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Evaluation and Management of Obesity In India.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: S V M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9519829 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul-Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
ESI Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Evaluation and Management of Obesity In India.
S V Madhu M Nitin Kapoor K Sambit Das D Nishant Raizada R Sanjay Kalra K
Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolism 20220701 4
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeTo develop Mexico's first methodologically rigorous clinical practice guideline for the management of adult overweight and obesity. The target audiences are interdisciplinary healthcare professionals across healthcare systems who are the first point of contact for patients with obesity in Mexico, patients, and health system decision makers.Recent findingsA review of recent international obesity clinical practice guidelines and an expert consensus process identified: i) common recommendations appropriate for implementation in Mexico and ii) knowledge gaps requiring the formulation of new recommendations. In all, 20 new recommendations and 20 good practice statements were developed using the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision Framework and expert consensus. Overweight and obesity negatively impact the health and well-being of individuals and populations in Mexico. This guideline aims to establish a new evidence-based, patient-centered, non-stigmatizing, and practical treatment and management framework, based on the fundamental principles of chronic disease prevention and management.
| S-EPMC11522083 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis survey of international experts in obesity management was conducted to achieve consensus on standardized definitions and to identify areas of consensus and non-consensus in metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) to assist in an algorithm of clinical practice guidelines for the management of obesity.MethodsA three-round Delphi survey with 136 statements was conducted by 43 experts in obesity management comprising 26 bariatric surgeons, 4 endoscopists, 8 endocrinologists, 2 nutritionists, 2 counsellors, an internist, and a pediatrician spanning six continents over a 2-day meeting in Hamburg, Germany. To reduce bias, voting was unanimous, and the statements were neither favorable nor unfavorable to the issue voted or evenly balanced between favorable and unfavorable. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% inter-voter agreement.ResultsConsensus was reached on all 15 essential definitional and reporting statements, including initial suboptimal clinical response, baseline weight, recurrent weight gain, conversion, and revision surgery. Consensus was reached on 95/121 statements on the type of surgical procedures favoring Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty. Moderate consensus was reached for sleeve gastrectomy single-anastomosis duodenoileostomy and none on the role of intra-gastric balloons. Consensus was reached for MBS in patients > 65 and < 18 years old, with a BMI > 50 kg/m2, and with various obesity-related complications such as type 2 diabetes, liver, and kidney disease.ConclusionsIn this survey of 43 multi-disciplinary experts, consensus was reached on standardized definitions and reporting standards applicable to the whole medical community. An algorithm for treating patients with obesity was explored utilizing a thoughtful multimodal approach.
| S-EPMC10781804 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionClinical practice guidelines(CPGs) are important tools for medical decision-making. Given the high prevalence and financial burden associated with tobacco use disorder(TUD), it is critical that recommendations within CPGs are based on robust evidence. Systematic reviews(SRs) are considered the highest level of evidence, thus, we evaluated the quality of SRs underpinning CPG recommendations for TUD.MethodsWe used PubMed to search for CPGs relating to TUD published between January 1, 2010 and May 21, 2021. SRs were extracted from CPG references and evaluated using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA) and A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews(AMSTAR-2) tools. We then compared SRs conducted by the Cochrane Collaboration with non-Cochrane SRs using a Mann-Whitney U test and determined associations between PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 extracted characteristics using multiple regression.ResultsOur search generated 10 CPGs with 98 SRs extracted. Mean PRISMA completion was 74.7%(SD = 16.7) and mean AMSTAR-2 completion was 53.8%(SD = 22.0) across all guidelines. Cochrane SRs were more complete than non-Cochrane studies in the PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 assessments. The regression model showed a statistically significant association between PRISMA completion and AMSTAR-2 rating, with those classified as "low" or "moderate" quality having higher PRISMA completion than those with "critically low" ratings.ConclusionWe found substandard adherence to PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 checklists across SRs cited in TUD CPGs. A lack of recent SRs in CPGs could lead to outdated recommendations. Therefore, frequent guideline updates with recently published evidence may ensure more accurate clinical recommendations and improve patient care.ImplicationsSystematic reviews used to underpin clinical practice guideline recommendations influence treatment decisions and, ultimately, patient outcomes. We found that many systematic reviews underpinning tobacco use disorder guideline recommendations were out of date and unsatisfactory in reporting and quality. Thus, including newer systematic reviews containing more recently conducted trials and better reporting could alter recommendations and improve the rate of successful tobacco cessation attempts.
| S-EPMC9048867 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeSignificant concerns exist regarding the content and reliability of oncology clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report "Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust" established standards for developing trustworthy CPGs. By using these standards as a benchmark, we sought to evaluate recent oncology guidelines.MethodsCPGs and consensus statements addressing the screening, evaluation, or management of the four leading causes of cancer-related mortality in the United States (lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers) published between January 2005 and December 2010 were identified. A standardized scoring system based on the eight IOM standards was used to critically evaluate the methodology, content, and disclosure policies of CPGs. All CPGs were given two scores; points were awarded for eight standards and 20 subcriteria.ResultsNo CPG fully met all the IOM standards. The average overall scores were 2.75 of 8 possible standards and 8.24 of 20 possible subcriteria. Less than half the CPGs were based on a systematic review. Only half the CPG panels addressed conflicts of interest. Most did not comply with standards for inclusion of patient and public involvement in the development or review process, nor did they specify their process for updating. CPGs were most consistent with IOM standards for transparency, articulation of recommendations, and use of external review.ConclusionThe vast majority of oncology CPGs fail to meet the IOM standards for trustworthy guidelines. On the basis of these results, there is still much to be done to make guidelines as methodologically sound and evidence-based as possible.
| S-EPMC5073383 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4825161 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4099340 | biostudies-literature
Project description:[This corrects the article on p. 34 in vol. 59.].
| S-EPMC5547881 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC1839777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Wilderness Medical Society convened an expert panel in 2018 to develop a set of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of type 1 and 2 diabetes, as well as the recognition, prevention, and treatment of complications of diabetes in wilderness athletes. We present a review of the classifications, pathophysiology, and evidence-based guidelines for planning and preventive measures, as well as best practice recommendations for both routine and urgent therapeutic management of diabetes and glycemic complications. These recommendations are graded based on the quality of supporting evidence and balance between the benefits and risks or burdens for each recommendation.
| S-EPMC7510348 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3796673 | biostudies-literature