RT Book, Section
A1 Brignardello-Petersen, Romina
A1 Carrasco-Labra, Alonso
A1 Guyatt, Gordon H.
A2 Guyatt, Gordon
A2 Rennie, Drummond
A2 Meade, Maureen O.
A2 Cook, Deborah J.
SR Print(0)
ID 1191942955
T1 How to Interpret and Use a Clinical Practice Guideline or Recommendation
T2 Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
YR 2015
FD 2015
PB McGraw-Hill Education
PP New York, NY
SN 978-0-07-179071-0
LK jamaevidence.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?aid=1191942955
RD 2024/04/24
AB CLINICAL  SCENARIOA  family  physician  is  seeing  a  25-year-old  woman  with  seasonal  allergic  rhinitis.  This  year,  her  nasal  and  ocular  symptoms  are  severe  enough  that  she  is  seeking  medical  care.  After  the  physician  and  patient  discuss  the  treatment  options,  the  physician  initiates  single  therapy  with  an  intranasal  corticosteroid  but  is  aware  of  an  alternative  treatment,  an  intranasal  H1  antihistamine.To  inform  her  decision,  the  physician  searches  for  an  evidence-based  recommendation  and  finds  the  following:  “In  patients  with  seasonal  allergic  rhinitis,  we  suggest  an  intranasal  corticosteroid  rather  than  an  intranasal  antihistamine  (conditional  recommendation,  moderate  certainty  of  evidence).”1The  physician  explains  to  the  patient  that  a  conditional  recommendation  means  that  the  therapy  is  likely  to  be  the  best  choice,  but  because  of  the  patient’s  particular  situation,  it  may  not  be.  The  physician  prescribes  an  intranasal  corticosteroid  but  explains  that  she  will  follow  up  with  the  patient  with  a  telephone  call  after  she  reads  further  about  this  recommendation.