Consensus Summary Statement of the International Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Multimodality Monitoring in Neurocritical CareA statement for healthcare professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

被引：0
作者：
Peter Le Roux
David K. Menon
Giuseppe Citerio
Paul Vespa
Mary Kay Bader
Gretchen M. Brophy
Michael N. Diringer
Nino Stocchetti
Walter Videtta
Rocco Armonda
Neeraj Badjatia
Julian Böesel
Randall Chesnut
Sherry Chou
Jan Claassen
Marek Czosnyka
Michael De Georgia
Anthony Figaji
Jennifer Fugate
Raimund Helbok
David Horowitz
Peter Hutchinson
Monisha Kumar
Molly McNett
Chad Miller
Andrew Naidech
Mauro Oddo
DaiWai Olson
Kristine O’Phelan
J. Javier Provencio
Corinna Puppo
Richard Riker
Claudia Robertson
Michael Schmidt
Fabio Taccone
机构：
[1] Lankenau Medical Center,Brain and Spine Center, Suite 370, Medical Science Building
[2] University of Cambridge Consultant,Neurosciences Critical Care Unit, Division of Anaesthesia
[3] Ospedale San Gerardo,NeuroIntensive Care Unit, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care
[4] David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA,Neuro/Critical Care CNS
[5] Mission Hospital,Neurocritical Care Section, Department of Neurology
[6] Virginia Commonwealth University,Department of Physiopathology and Transplant
[7] Washington University,ICU Neurocritical Care
[8] Milan University,Department of Neurosurgery
[9] Neuro ICU,Department of Neurology
[10] Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico,Department of Neurology
[11] Hospital Nacional ‘Prof. a. Posadas’,Harborview Medical Center
[12] El Palomar,Department of Neurology
[13] MedStar Georgetown University Hospital,Neurological Intensive Care Unit
[14] Medstar Health,Department of Neurosurgery
[15] University of Maryland Medical Center,Neurocritical Care Center, Cerebrovascular Center
[16] Ruprecht-Karls University,Neurocritical Care Unit, Department of Neurology
[17] Hospital Heidelberg,Department of Clinical Neurosciences
[18] University of Washington,Department of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine
[19] Brigham and Women’s Hospital,Nursing Research
[20] Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons,Division of Cerebrovascular Diseases and Neurocritical Care
[21] University of Cambridge,Department of Neurology
[22] Addenbrooke’s Hospital,Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Biology and Medicine University of Lausanne
[23] University Hospital Case Medical Center,Neurology, Neurotherapeutics and Neurosurgery
[24] Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine,Department of Neurology
[25] University of Cape Town,Cerebrovascular Center and Neuroinflammation Research Center
[26] 617 Institute for Child Health,Intensive Care Unit, Hospital de Clinicas
[27] Red Cross Children’s Hospital,Critical Care Medicine
[28] Mayo Clinic,Department of Neurosurgery, Center for Neurosurgical Intensive Care
[29] Innsbruck Medical University,Laboratoire de Recherche Experimentale, Department of Intensive Care
[30] University of Pennsylvania Health System,undefined
[31] University of Cambridge,undefined
[32] University of Pennsylvania,undefined
[33] The MetroHealth System,undefined
[34] The Ohio State University,undefined
[35] Northwestern University Feinberg,undefined
[36] CHUV University Hospital,undefined
[37] University of Texas Southwestern,undefined
[38] University of Miami,undefined
[39] Miller School of Medicine,undefined
[40] Lerner College of Medicine,undefined
[41] Cleveland Clinic,undefined
[42] Universidad de la República,undefined
[43] Maine Medical Center,undefined
[44] Ben Taub Hospital,undefined
[45] Baylor College of Medicine,undefined
[46] Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons,undefined
[47] Erasme Hospital,undefined
来源：
Neurocritical Care | 2014年 / 21卷
关键词：
Consensus development conference; Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE); Brain metabolism; Brain oxygen; Clinical trials; Intracranial pressure; Microdialysis; Multimodal monitoring; Neuromonitoring; Traumatic brain injury; Brain physiology; Bioinformatics; Biomarkers; Neurocritical care; Clinical guidelines;
D O I：
暂无
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Neurocritical care depends, in part, on careful patient monitoring but as yet there are little data on what processes are the most important to monitor, how these should be monitored, and whether monitoring these processes is cost-effective and impacts outcome. At the same time, bioinformatics is a rapidly emerging field in critical care but as yet there is little agreement or standardization on what information is important and how it should be displayed and analyzed. The Neurocritical Care Society in collaboration with the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, the Society for Critical Care Medicine, and the Latin America Brain Injury Consortium organized an international, multidisciplinary consensus conference to begin to address these needs. International experts from neurosurgery, neurocritical care, neurology, critical care, neuroanesthesiology, nursing, pharmacy, and informatics were recruited on the basis of their research, publication record, and expertise. They undertook a systematic literature review to develop recommendations about specific topics on physiologic processes important to the care of patients with disorders that require neurocritical care. This review does not make recommendations about treatment, imaging, and intraoperative monitoring. A multidisciplinary jury, selected for their expertise in clinical investigation and development of practice guidelines, guided this process. The GRADE system was used to develop recommendations based on literature review, discussion, integrating the literature with the participants’ collective experience, and critical review by an impartial jury. Emphasis was placed on the principle that recommendations should be based on both data quality and on trade-offs and translation into clinical practice. Strong consideration was given to providing pragmatic guidance and recommendations for bedside neuromonitoring, even in the absence of high quality data.
引用
收藏
页码：1 / 26
页数：25
相关论文
共 1094 条
  • [1] Jaeschke R(2008)Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive BMJ 337 a744-879
  • [2] Guyatt GH(2014)Clinical meaning of the GRADE rules Intensive Care Med 40 877-735
  • [3] Dellinger P(2013)GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength J Clin Epidemiol 66 726-394
  • [4] Rochwerg B(2011)GRADE guidelines: 1 Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables J Clin Epidemiol 64 383-E142
  • [5] Alhazzani W(2014)Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise CMAJ 186 E123-250
  • [6] Jaeschke R(2012)Deciding what type of evidence and outcomes to include in guidelines: article 5 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report Proc Am Thorac Soc 9 243-400
  • [7] Andrews JC(2012)Developing clinical practice guidelines: types of evidence and outcomes; values and economics, synthesis, grading, and presentation and deriving recommendations Implement Sci 4 61-42
  • [8] Schünemann HJ(2011)Application of GRADE: making evidence-based recommendations about diagnostic tests in clinical practice guidelines Implement Sci 10 62-1129
  • [9] Oxman AD(2011)GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes J Clin Epidemiol 64 395-661
  • [10] Pottie K(2005)A comparison of the Glasgow Coma Scale score to simplified alternative scores for the prediction of traumatic brain injury outcomes Ann Emerg Med 45 37-280
12345678910