Intermountain Healthcare

OBJECTIVE: To update and expand the 2013 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the ICU. DESIGN: Thirty-two international experts, four methodologists, and four critical illness survivors met virtually at least monthly. All section groups gathered face-to-face at annual Society of Critical Care Medicine congresses; virtual connections included those unable to attend. A formal conflict of interest policy was developed a priori and enforced throughout the process. Teleconferences and electronic discussions among subgroups and whole panel were part of the guidelines' development. A general content review was completed face-to-face by all panel members in January 2017. METHODS: Content experts, methodologists, and ICU survivors were represented in each of the five sections of the guidelines: Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption). Each section created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome, and nonactionable, descriptive questions based on perceived clinical relevance. The guideline group then voted their ranking, and patients prioritized their importance. For each Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome question, sections searched the best available evidence, determined its quality, and formulated recommendations as "strong," "conditional," or "good" practice statements based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation principles. In addition, evidence gaps and clinical caveats were explicitly identified. RESULTS: The Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) panel issued 37 recommendations (three strong and 34 conditional), two good practice statements, and 32 ungraded, nonactionable statements. Three questions from the patient-centered prioritized question list remained without recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial agreement among a large, interdisciplinary cohort of international experts regarding evidence supporting recommendations, and the remaining literature gaps in the assessment, prevention, and treatment of Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) in critically ill adults. Highlighting this evidence and the research needs will improve Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) management and provide the foundation for improved outcomes and science in this vulnerable population.

BACKGROUND: Although gastric bypass surgery accounts for 80% of bariatric surgery in the United States, only limited long-term data are available on mortality among patients who have undergone this procedure as compared with severely obese persons from a general population. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we determined the long-term mortality (from 1984 to 2002) among 9949 patients who had undergone gastric bypass surgery and 9628 severely obese persons who applied for driver's licenses. From these subjects, 7925 surgical patients and 7925 severely obese control subjects were matched for age, sex, and body-mass index. We determined the rates of death from any cause and from specific causes with the use of the National Death Index. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 7.1 years, adjusted long-term mortality from any cause in the surgery group decreased by 40%, as compared with that in the control group (37.6 vs. 57.1 deaths per 10,000 person-years, P<0.001); cause-specific mortality in the surgery group decreased by 56% for coronary artery disease (2.6 vs. 5.9 per 10,000 person-years, P=0.006), by 92% for diabetes (0.4 vs. 3.4 per 10,000 person-years, P=0.005), and by 60% for cancer (5.5 vs. 13.3 per 10,000 person-years, P<0.001). However, rates of death not caused by disease, such as accidents and suicide, were 58% higher in the surgery group than in the control group (11.1 vs. 6.4 per 10,000 person-years, P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term total mortality after gastric bypass surgery was significantly reduced, particularly deaths from diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. However, the rate of death from causes other than disease was higher in the surgery group than in the control group.

PURPOSE: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing and its utility as a predictive marker in invasive breast cancer. METHODS: ASCO/CAP convened an Update Committee that included coauthors of the 2007 guideline to conduct a systematic literature review and update recommendations for optimal HER2 testing. RESULTS: The Update Committee identified criteria and areas requiring clarification to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or in situ hybridization (ISH). The guideline was reviewed and approved by both organizations. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Update Committee recommends that HER2 status (HER2 negative or positive) be determined in all patients with invasive (early stage or recurrence) breast cancer on the basis of one or more HER2 test results (negative, equivocal, or positive). Testing criteria define HER2-positive status when (on observing within an area of tumor that amounts to >10% of contiguous and homogeneous tumor cells) there is evidence of protein overexpression (IHC) or gene amplification (HER2 copy number or HER2/CEP17 ratio by ISH based on counting at least 20 cells within the area). If results are equivocal (revised criteria), reflex testing should be performed using an alternative assay (IHC or ISH). Repeat testing should be considered if results seem discordant with other histopathologic findings. Laboratories should demonstrate high concordance with a validated HER2 test on a sufficiently large and representative set of specimens. Testing must be performed in a laboratory accredited by CAP or another accrediting entity. The Update Committee urges providers and health systems to cooperate to ensure the highest quality testing.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of treatment with rituximab plus methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies and to explore the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rituximab in this population. METHODS: We evaluated primary efficacy and safety at 24 weeks in patients enrolled in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Efficacy of Rituximab in RA (REFLEX) Trial, a 2-year, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study of rituximab therapy. Patients with active RA and an inadequate response to 1 or more anti-TNF agents were randomized to receive intravenous rituximab (1 course, consisting of 2 infusions of 1,000 mg each) or placebo, both with background MTX. The primary efficacy end point was a response on the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at 24 weeks. Secondary end points were responses on the ACR50 and ACR70 improvement criteria, the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, and the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria at 24 weeks. Additional end points included scores on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index (DI), and Short Form 36 (SF-36) instruments, as well as Genant-modified Sharp radiographic scores at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Patients assigned to placebo (n = 209) and rituximab (n = 311) had active, longstanding RA. At week 24, significantly more (P < 0.0001) rituximab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients demonstrated ACR20 (51% versus 18%), ACR50 (27% versus 5%), and ACR70 (12% versus 1%) responses and moderate-to-good EULAR responses (65% versus 22%). All ACR response parameters were significantly improved in rituximab-treated patients, who also had clinically meaningful improvements in fatigue, disability, and health-related quality of life (demonstrated by FACIT-F, HAQ DI, and SF-36 scores, respectively) and showed a trend toward less progression in radiographic end points. Rituximab depleted peripheral CD20+ B cells, but the mean immunoglobulin levels (IgG, IgM, and IgA) remained within normal ranges. Most adverse events occurred with the first rituximab infusion and were of mild-to-moderate severity. The rate of serious infections was 5.2 per 100 patient-years in the rituximab group and 3.7 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: At 24 weeks, a single course of rituximab with concomitant MTX therapy provided significant and clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity in patients with active, longstanding RA who had an inadequate response to 1 or more anti-TNF therapies.

PURPOSE: To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

PURPOSE.—: To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer guideline. METHODS.—: Based on the signals approach, an Expert Panel reviewed published literature and research survey results on the observed frequency of less common in situ hybridization (ISH) patterns to update the recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS.—: Two recommendations addressed via correspondence in 2015 are included. First, immunohistochemistry (IHC) 2+ is defined as invasive breast cancer with weak to moderate complete membrane staining observed in >10% of tumor cells. Second, if the initial HER2 test result in a core needle biopsy specimen of a primary breast cancer is negative, a new HER2 test may (not "must") be ordered on the excision specimen based on specific clinical criteria. The HER2 testing algorithm for breast cancer is updated to address the recommended workup for less common clinical scenarios (approximately 5% of cases) observed when using a dual-probe ISH assay. These scenarios are described as ISH group 2 ( HER2/chromosome enumeration probe 17 [CEP17] ratio ≥2.0; average HER2 copy number <4.0 signals per cell), ISH group 3 ( HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0; average HER2 copy number ≥6.0 signals per cell), and ISH group 4 ( HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0; average HER2 copy number ≥4.0 and <6.0 signals per cell). The diagnostic approach includes more rigorous interpretation criteria for ISH and requires concomitant IHC review for dual-probe ISH groups 2 to 4 to arrive at the most accurate HER2 status designation (positive or negative) based on combined interpretation of the ISH and IHC assays. The Expert Panel recommends that laboratories using single-probe ISH assays include concomitant IHC review as part of the interpretation of all single-probe ISH assay results.

Importance: Catheter ablation is effective in restoring sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF), but its effects on long-term mortality and stroke risk are uncertain. Objective: To determine whether catheter ablation is more effective than conventional medical therapy for improving outcomes in AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation trial is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized trial involving 126 centers in 10 countries. A total of 2204 symptomatic patients with AF aged 65 years and older or younger than 65 years with 1 or more risk factors for stroke were enrolled from November 2009 to April 2016, with follow-up through December 31, 2017. Interventions: The catheter ablation group (n = 1108) underwent pulmonary vein isolation, with additional ablative procedures at the discretion of site investigators. The drug therapy group (n = 1096) received standard rhythm and/or rate control drugs guided by contemporaneous guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Among 13 prespecified secondary end points, 3 are included in this report: all-cause mortality; total mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization; and AF recurrence. Results: Of the 2204 patients randomized (median age, 68 years; 37.2% female; 42.9% had paroxysmal AF and 57.1% had persistent AF), 89.3% completed the trial. Of the patients assigned to catheter ablation, 1006 (90.8%) underwent the procedure. Of the patients assigned to drug therapy, 301 (27.5%) ultimately received catheter ablation. In the intention-to-treat analysis, over a median follow-up of 48.5 months, the primary end point occurred in 8.0% (n = 89) of patients in the ablation group vs 9.2% (n = 101) of patients in the drug therapy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65-1.15]; P = .30). Among the secondary end points, outcomes in the ablation group vs the drug therapy group, respectively, were 5.2% vs 6.1% for all-cause mortality (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.60-1.21]; P = .38), 51.7% vs 58.1% for death or cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.93]; P = .001), and 49.9% vs 69.5% for AF recurrence (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.45-0.60]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with AF, the strategy of catheter ablation, compared with medical therapy, did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. However, the estimated treatment effect of catheter ablation was affected by lower-than-expected event rates and treatment crossovers, which should be considered in interpreting the results of the trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00911508.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir improves clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with moderate-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Whether the use of remdesivir in symptomatic, nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19 who are at high risk for disease progression prevents hospitalization is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19 who had symptom onset within the previous 7 days and who had at least one risk factor for disease progression (age ≥60 years, obesity, or certain coexisting medical conditions). Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 and 100 mg on days 2 and 3) or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause by day 28. The primary safety end point was any adverse event. A secondary end point was a composite of a Covid-19-related medically attended visit or death from any cause by day 28. RESULTS: A total of 562 patients who underwent randomization and received at least one dose of remdesivir or placebo were included in the analyses: 279 patients in the remdesivir group and 283 in the placebo group. The mean age was 50 years, 47.9% of the patients were women, and 41.8% were Hispanic or Latinx. The most common coexisting conditions were diabetes mellitus (61.6%), obesity (55.2%), and hypertension (47.7%). Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause occurred in 2 patients (0.7%) in the remdesivir group and in 15 (5.3%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 0.59; P = 0.008). A total of 4 of 246 patients (1.6%) in the remdesivir group and 21 of 252 (8.3%) in the placebo group had a Covid-19-related medically attended visit by day 28 (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.56). No patients had died by day 28. Adverse events occurred in 42.3% of the patients in the remdesivir group and in 46.3% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among nonhospitalized patients who were at high risk for Covid-19 progression, a 3-day course of remdesivir had an acceptable safety profile and resulted in an 87% lower risk of hospitalization or death than placebo. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; PINETREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04501952; EudraCT number, 2020-003510-12.).

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain how best to screen pregnant women for the presence of fetal Down's syndrome: to perform first-trimester screening, to perform second-trimester screening, or to use strategies incorporating measurements in both trimesters. METHODS: Women with singleton pregnancies underwent first-trimester combined screening (measurement of nuchal translucency, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A [PAPP-A], and the free beta subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin at 10 weeks 3 days through 13 weeks 6 days of gestation) and second-trimester quadruple screening (measurement of alpha-fetoprotein, total human chorionic gonadotropin, unconjugated estriol, and inhibin A at 15 through 18 weeks of gestation). We compared the results of stepwise sequential screening (risk results provided after each test), fully integrated screening (single risk result provided), and serum integrated screening (identical to fully integrated screening, but without nuchal translucency). RESULTS: First-trimester screening was performed in 38,167 patients; 117 had a fetus with Down's syndrome. At a 5 percent false positive rate, the rates of detection of Down's syndrome were as follows: with first-trimester combined screening, 87 percent, 85 percent, and 82 percent for measurements performed at 11, 12, and 13 weeks, respectively; with second-trimester quadruple screening, 81 percent; with stepwise sequential screening, 95 percent; with serum integrated screening, 88 percent; and with fully integrated screening with first-trimester measurements performed at 11 weeks, 96 percent. Paired comparisons found significant differences between the tests, except for the comparison between serum integrated screening and combined screening. CONCLUSIONS: First-trimester combined screening at 11 weeks of gestation is better than second-trimester quadruple screening but at 13 weeks has results similar to second-trimester quadruple screening. Both stepwise sequential screening and fully integrated screening have high rates of detection of Down's syndrome, with low false positive rates.

Abstract Purpose. —To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. Methods. —The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. Results. —Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in pre-analytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. Recommendations. —The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials.

Identification and measurement of adverse medical events is central to patient safety, forming a foundation for accountability, prioritizing problems to work on, generating ideas for safer care, and testing which interventions work. We compared three methods to detect adverse events in hospitalized patients, using the same patient sample set from three leading hospitals. We found that the adverse event detection methods commonly used to track patient safety in the United States today-voluntary reporting and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Indicators-fared very poorly compared to other methods and missed 90 percent of the adverse events. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool found at least ten times more confirmed, serious events than these other methods. Overall, adverse events occurred in one-third of hospital admissions. Reliance on voluntary reporting and the Patient Safety Indicators could produce misleading conclusions about the current safety of care in the US health care system and misdirect efforts to improve patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Few long-term or controlled studies of bariatric surgery have been conducted to date. We report the 12-year follow-up results of an observational, prospective study of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass that was conducted in the United States. METHODS: A total of 1156 patients with severe obesity comprised three groups: 418 patients who sought and underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (surgery group), 417 patients who sought but did not undergo surgery (primarily for insurance reasons) (nonsurgery group 1), and 321 patients who did not seek surgery (nonsurgery group 2). We performed clinical examinations at baseline and at 2 years, 6 years, and 12 years to ascertain the presence of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. RESULTS: The follow-up rate exceeded 90% at 12 years. The adjusted mean change from baseline in body weight in the surgery group was -45.0 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], -47.2 to -42.9; mean percent change, -35.0) at 2 years, -36.3 kg (95% CI, -39.0 to -33.5; mean percent change, -28.0) at 6 years, and -35.0 kg (95% CI, -38.4 to -31.7; mean percent change, -26.9) at 12 years; the mean change at 12 years in nonsurgery group 1 was -2.9 kg (95% CI, -6.9 to 1.0; mean percent change, -2.0), and the mean change at 12 years in nonsurgery group 2 was 0 kg (95% CI, -3.5 to 3.5; mean percent change, -0.9). Among the patients in the surgery group who had type 2 diabetes at baseline, type 2 diabetes remitted in 66 of 88 patients (75%) at 2 years, in 54 of 87 patients (62%) at 6 years, and in 43 of 84 patients (51%) at 12 years. The odds ratio for the incidence of type 2 diabetes at 12 years was 0.08 (95% CI, 0.03 to 0.24) for the surgery group versus nonsurgery group 1 and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.03 to 0.29) for the surgery group versus nonsurgery group 2 (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The surgery group had higher remission rates and lower incidence rates of hypertension and dyslipidemia than did nonsurgery group 1 (P<0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed long-term durability of weight loss and effective remission and prevention of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others.).

BACKGROUND: Miscommunications are a leading cause of serious medical errors. Data from multicenter studies assessing programs designed to improve handoff of information about patient care are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a prospective intervention study of a resident handoff-improvement program in nine hospitals, measuring rates of medical errors, preventable adverse events, and miscommunications, as well as resident workflow. The intervention included a mnemonic to standardize oral and written handoffs, handoff and communication training, a faculty development and observation program, and a sustainability campaign. Error rates were measured through active surveillance. Handoffs were assessed by means of evaluation of printed handoff documents and audio recordings. Workflow was assessed through time-motion observations. The primary outcome had two components: medical errors and preventable adverse events. RESULTS: In 10,740 patient admissions, the medical-error rate decreased by 23% from the preintervention period to the postintervention period (24.5 vs. 18.8 per 100 admissions, P<0.001), and the rate of preventable adverse events decreased by 30% (4.7 vs. 3.3 events per 100 admissions, P<0.001). The rate of nonpreventable adverse events did not change significantly (3.0 and 2.8 events per 100 admissions, P=0.79). Site-level analyses showed significant error reductions at six of nine sites. Across sites, significant increases were observed in the inclusion of all prespecified key elements in written documents and oral communication during handoff (nine written and five oral elements; P<0.001 for all 14 comparisons). There were no significant changes from the preintervention period to the postintervention period in the duration of oral handoffs (2.4 and 2.5 minutes per patient, respectively; P=0.55) or in resident workflow, including patient-family contact and computer time. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the handoff program was associated with reductions in medical errors and in preventable adverse events and with improvements in communication, without a negative effect on workflow. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and others.).

PURPOSE: To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. METHODS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. RESULTS: Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in pre-analytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials.

Objective This update of a 2008 guideline from the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation provides evidence‐based recommendations to benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), defined as a disorder of the inner ear characterized by repeated episodes of positional vertigo. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer advocate added to the update group; new evidence from 2 clinical practice guidelines, 20 systematic reviews, and 27 randomized controlled trials; enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making; a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships; and new and expanded recommendations for the diagnosis and management of BPPV. Purpose The primary purposes of this guideline are to improve the quality of care and outcomes for BPPV by improving the accurate and efficient diagnosis of BPPV, reducing the inappropriate use of vestibular suppressant medications, decreasing the inappropriate use of ancillary testing such as radiographic imaging, and increasing the use of appropriate therapeutic repositioning maneuvers. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with BPPV, and it applies to any setting in which BPPV would be identified, monitored, or managed. The target patient for the guideline is aged ≥18 years with a suspected or potential diagnosis of BPPV. The primary outcome considered in this guideline is the resolution of the symptoms associated with BPPV. Secondary outcomes considered include an increased rate of accurate diagnoses of BPPV, a more efficient return to regular activities and work, decreased use of inappropriate medications and unnecessary diagnostic tests, reduction in recurrence of BPPV, and reduction in adverse events associated with undiagnosed or untreated BPPV. Other outcomes considered include minimizing costs in the diagnosis and treatment of BPPV, minimizing potentially unnecessary return physician visits, and maximizing the health‐related quality of life of individuals afflicted with BPPV. Action Statements The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians should (1) diagnose posterior semicircular canal BPPV when vertigo associated with torsional, upbeating nystagmus is provoked by the Dix‐Hallpike maneuver, performed by bringing the patient from an upright to supine position with the head turned 45° to one side and neck extended 20° with the affected ear down, and (2) treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, patients with posterior canal BPPV with a canalith repositioning procedure. The update group made a strong recommendation against postprocedural postural restrictions after canalith repositioning procedure for posterior canal BPPV. The update group made recommendations that the clinician should (1) perform, or refer to a clinician who can perform, a supine roll test to assess for lateral semicircular canal BPPV if the patient has a history compatible with BPPV and the Dix‐Hallpike test exhibits horizontal or no nystagmus; (2) differentiate, or refer to a clinician who can differentiate, BPPV from other causes of imbalance, dizziness, and vertigo; (3) assess patients with BPPV for factors that modify management, including impaired mobility or balance, central nervous system disorders, a lack of home support, and/or increased risk for falling; (4) reassess patients within 1 month after an initial period of observation or treatment to document resolution or persistence of symptoms; (5) evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, patients with persistent symptoms for unresolved BPPV and/or underlying peripheral vestibular or central nervous system disorders; and (6) educate patients regarding the impact of BPPV on their safety, the potential for disease recurrence, and the importance of follow‐up. The update group made recommendations against (1) radiographic imaging for a patient who meets diagnostic criteria for BPPV in the absence of additional signs and/or symptoms inconsistent with BPPV that warrant imaging, (2) vestibular testing for a patient who meets diagnostic criteria for BPPV in the absence of additional vestibular signs and/or symptoms inconsistent with BPPV that warrant testing, and (3) routinely treating BPPV with vestibular suppressant medications such as antihistamines and/or benzodiazepines. The guideline update group provided the options that clinicians may offer (1) observation with follow‐up as initial management for patients with BPPV and (2) vestibular rehabilitation, either self‐administered or with a clinician, in the treatment of BPPV.

OBJECTIVES: Describe the state of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) in 1992 and their evolution by 2015 and where EHRs are expected to be in 25 years. Further to discuss the expectations for EHRs in 1992 and explore which of them were realized and what events accelerated or disrupted/derailed how EHRs evolved. METHODS: Literature search based on "Electronic Health Record", "Medical Record", and "Medical Chart" using Medline, Google, Wikipedia Medical, and Cochrane Libraries resulted in an initial review of 2,356 abstracts and other information in papers and books. Additional papers and books were identified through the review of references cited in the initial review. RESULTS: By 1992, hardware had become more affordable, powerful, and compact and the use of personal computers, local area networks, and the Internet provided faster and easier access to medical information. EHRs were initially developed and used at academic medical facilities but since most have been replaced by large vendor EHRs. While EHR use has increased and clinicians are being prepared to practice in an EHR-mediated world, technical issues have been overshadowed by procedural, professional, social, political, and especially ethical issues as well as the need for compliance with standards and information security. There have been enormous advancements that have taken place, but many of the early expectations for EHRs have not been realized and current EHRs still do not meet the needs of today's rapidly changing healthcare environment. CONCLUSION: The current use of EHRs initiated by new technology would have been hard to foresee. Current and new EHR technology will help to provide international standards for interoperable applications that use health, social, economic, behavioral, and environmental data to communicate, interpret, and act intelligently upon complex healthcare information to foster precision medicine and a learning health system.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic-guided dosing of warfarin is a promising application of "personalized medicine" but has not been adequately tested in randomized trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consenting patients (n=206) being initiated on warfarin were randomized to pharmacogenetic-guided or standard dosing. Buccal swab DNA was genotyped for CYP2C9 *2 and CYP2C9 *3 and VKORC1C1173T with a rapid assay. Standard dosing followed an empirical protocol, whereas pharmacogenetic-guided dosing followed a regression equation including the 3 genetic variants and age, sex, and weight. Prothrombin time international normalized ratio (INR) was measured routinely on days 0, 3, 5, 8, 21, 60, and 90. A research pharmacist unblinded to treatment strategy managed dose adjustments. Patients were followed up for up to 3 months. Pharmacogenetic-guided predicted doses more accurately approximated stable doses (P<0.001), resulting in smaller (P=0.002) and fewer (P=0.03) dosing changes and INRs (P=0.06). However, percent out-of-range INRs (pharmacogenetic = 30.7%, standard = 33.1%), the primary end point, did not differ significantly between arms. Despite this, when restricted to wild-type patients (who required larger doses; P=0.001) and multiple variant carriers (who required smaller doses; P<0.001) in exploratory analyses, results (pharmacogenetic = 29%, standard = 39%) achieved nominal significance (P=0.03). Multiple variant allele carriers were at increased risk of an INR of > or = 4 (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: An algorithm guided by pharmacogenetic and clinical factors improved the accuracy and efficiency of warfarin dose initiation. Despite this, the primary end point of a reduction in out-of-range INRs was not achieved. In subset analyses, pharmacogenetic guidance showed promise for wild-type and multiple variant genotypes.

CONTEXT: Extreme obesity is associated with health and cardiovascular disease risks. Although gastric bypass surgery induces rapid weight loss and ameliorates many of these risks in the short term, long-term outcomes are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery with weight loss, diabetes mellitus, and other health risks 6 years after surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective Utah-based study conducted between July 2000 and June 2011 of 1156 severely obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 35) participants aged 18 to 72 years (82% women; mean BMI, 45.9; 95% CI, 31.2-60.6) who sought and received RYGB surgery (n = 418), sought but did not have surgery (n = 417; control group 1), or who were randomly selected from a population-based sample not seeking weight loss surgery (n = 321; control group 2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weight loss, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and health-related quality of life were compared between participants having RYGB surgery and control participants using propensity score adjustment. RESULTS: Six years after surgery, patients who received RYGB surgery (with 92.6% follow-up) lost 27.7% (95% CI, 26.6%-28.9%) of their initial body weight compared with 0.2% (95% CI, -1.1% to 1.4%) gain in control group 1 and 0% (95% CI, -1.2% to 1.2%) in control group 2. Weight loss maintenance was superior in patients who received RYGB surgery, with 94% (95% CI, 92%-96%) and 76% (95% CI, 72%-81%) of patients receiving RYGB surgery maintaining at least 20% weight loss 2 and 6 years after surgery, respectively. Diabetes remission rates 6 years after surgery were 62% (95% CI, 49%-75%) in the RYGB surgery group, 8% (95% CI, 0%-16%) in control group 1, and 6% (95% CI, 0%-13%) in control group 2, with remission odds ratios (ORs) of 16.5 (95% CI, 4.7-57.6; P < .001) vs control group 1 and 21.5 (95% CI, 5.4-85.6; P < .001) vs control group 2. The incidence of diabetes throughout the course of the study was reduced after RYGB surgery (2%; 95% CI, 0%-4%; vs 17%; 95% CI, 10%-24%; OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.34 compared with control group 1 and 15%; 95% CI, 9%-21%; OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.67 compared with control group 2; both P < .001). The numbers of participants with bariatric surgery-related hospitalizations were 33 (7.9%), 13 (3.9%), and 6 (2.0%) for the RYGB surgery group and 2 control groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among severely obese patients, compared with nonsurgical control patients, the use of RYGB surgery was associated with higher rates of diabetes remission and lower risk of cardiovascular and other health outcomes over 6 years.

This is the second half of a two-part document updating the standard of care recommendations for spinal muscular atrophy published in 2007. This part includes updated recommendations on pulmonary management and acute care issues, and topics that have emerged in the last few years such as other organ involvement in the severe forms of spinal muscular atrophy and the role of medications. Ethical issues and the choice of palliative versus supportive care are also addressed. These recommendations are becoming increasingly relevant given recent clinical trials and the prospect that commercially available therapies will likely change the survival and natural history of this disease.

Warfarin is a widely used anticoagulant with a narrow therapeutic index and large interpatient variability in the dose required to achieve target anticoagulation. Common genetic variants in the cytochrome P450-2C9 (CYP2C9) and vitamin K-epoxide reductase complex (VKORC1) enzymes, in addition to known nongenetic factors, account for ~50% of warfarin dose variability. The purpose of this article is to assist in the interpretation and use of CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genotype data for estimating therapeutic warfarin dose to achieve an INR of 2-3, should genotype results be available to the clinician. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) of the National Institutes of Health Pharmacogenomics Research Network develops peer-reviewed gene-drug guidelines that are published and updated periodically on http://www.pharmgkb.org based on new developments in the field.(1).