LYMEPOLICYWONK: National Guidelines Clearinghouse–Listen Up

Byldoadmin

For Lyme patients, a key issue is how guidelines that conflict should be managed. We believe the list below, is a good start:

  •  Groups that are directly impacted by guideline recommendations (patients and primary care physicians) should be part of the process and have a meaningful seat at the table.
  • Large specialty groups should change the membership of the guidelines panel from one revision to the next.
  • Guidelines should be required to be revised within 5 years of their issue date
  • Guideline reports should not be issued unanimously unless all members fully agree to all sections.  Alternate interpretations and viewpoints should be recorded and issued along with the majority opinions.
  • When conflicting guidelines exist, this should be acknowledged in the guidelines, attempts to reconcile the conflicting guidelines should be documented together with the rationale for the recommendation.
  • All guidelines should recommend that physicians advise patients, as part of an informed consent process, when there are divergent viewpoints and treatment options.
  • Guidelines should identify gaps in the evidence base that future research should address.
  • In the absence of a strong evidence base, guidelines should not unduly constrain the exercise of clinical discretion by physicians or the exercise of evidence-based informed autonomous consent by patients.

We believe that patient participation in guideline development is essential to ensure that guidelines address the issues that are important to patients and are directed toward improving the patient’s quality of life.

You can sign the petition here.

The background for the NGC petition is in a prior blog post.

 

The LYME POLICY WONK blog is written by Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA, who is the Chief Executive Officer of LymeDisease.org, formerly CALDA. Contact her at lbjohnson@lymedisease.org.

Similar Posts

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: IOM Conference calls: A Phone to Nowhere?

    I have to say, I have not heard encouraging things about the IOM process. Most folks think the IDSA simply plucked a friendly forum to reaffirm its beleaguered Lyme guidelines and the tainted Lyme review panel process. The big question is: Does this process have any substance or is it just a matter of going through the motions? Is anybody listening on these "listening" phone calls? Is the IOM offering to listen to anyone who cares?

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: CALDA CALLS ON TRIBUNE TO PRINT OP ED REBUTTAL TO BIASED ARTICLE

    Lyme patients take a lot of heat, frankly too much heat. Sometimes reporters make errors, don’t have enough facts, and aren’t fully informed. And that is rough. But it is even rougher when reporters are informed and given the correct information and then ignore half of it. So what do you do? Well, CALDA has written the Chicago Tribune protesting the highly biased reporting in its December 8, 2010 article on Lyme disease. We have asked them to publish an Op Ed piece by CALDA. We believe that reporters have an ethical obligation to report on stories in a balanced manner. They also owe it to patients to set out both sides of a scientific debate. To do otherwise, puts the lives and health of thousands of sick people in danger. What do you think? If you are interested in supporting this effort, please write the Tribune (emails below). Ask them to publish an Op-Ed by CALDA to set the record straight. A tip of the hat to Ellen and the NYC Lyme Activism group for their wonderful work on this project. More information after the jump. . .

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: Recognizing the problem is the first step—Persistence.

    An important study by Dr. Stephen Barthold and Dr. Ben Luft was recently published. The title sounds a bit bleak, but don’t let the title fool you: “Ineffectiveness of Tigecycline against Persistent Borrelia burgdorferi”. This study is about how the little guy (Borrelia burgdorferi) always wins and survives despite antibiotic treatment—here tigecycline. To my mind, the findings on persistence are much more important than the finding that tigecycline doesn’t do the job. When one antibiotic doesn’t work, you try another, and if that one doesn’t work, well, you try another or you kick it up a notch and start trying combination antibiotics, like they do with tuberculosis. You don’t fold up the tent and go home because active infection requires antibiotic treatment. And, you won’t ever find out which antibiotic or combinations of antibiotic work, until you try them. So, roll up your sleeves, we have some work to do here.

  • Talking the talk

    Terrence McNally at KPFK, a local public radio station in Los Angeles interviewed me, Andy Wilson, Mandy, and Dr. Horowitz on June 23rd about the film, Under Our Skin, and about the antitrust settlement. It is a good listen if you have not heard it. The link to the podcast is below. A close friend snapped the picture of me in the booth.

  • LYMEPOLICYWONK: A Question of Ethical Reporting–Chicago Tribune/Los Angeles Times.

    Biased reporting harms the credibility of journalism, harms patients, and misleads the public. The recent Tribune piece, which is now being republished in other Tribune outlets (including the Los Angeles Times) distorts and manipulates reality and makes a ‘good story’ at the expense of professional journalism. It does this by ignoring science, and by characterizing patients as hapless victims and their physicians as frauds. It was called to task for its profound lack of professionalism by Knight Science Journalism Tracker. Articles on science that do not present both sides of a legitimate controversy in science do a serious injustice and may violate the canons of journalist ethics established by the Society of Professional Journalism. Today, I look at some of those canons and point out how the Tribune article fell short. More after the jump. . .