PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 17044829

Guidelines--are they useful?

Elinor Ben-Menachem·Jacqueline A French
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Antiepileptic drug (AED) guidelines are developed to improve medical decision making, to provide guidance and recommendation for patient management, to develop standards to judge or assess clinical practice, and to keep the cost-benefit ratio at an acceptable level. These guidelines are derived from evidence-based medicine (EBM), a four-tiered grading system that is used to analyze clinical trials and published experiments independent of clinical bias and experience. Although guidelines may not answer all questions it is critical that clinicians using them consider the available evidence, as well as the quality of the evidence, when incorporating the information in their decision making.

Explore related subjects

AnticonvulsantsClinical Trials as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisEpilepsyEvidence-Based MedicineHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Professional PracticeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elinor Ben-Menachem, Jacqueline A French. 2006. Guidelines--are they useful?. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2006.00663.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

A double-blind placebo-controlled trial of zonisamide (zonegran) in the treatment of essential tremor.

Medical therapy for essential tremor (ET), a common movement disorder, is often inadequate. We performed a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of zonisamide (ZNS), an antiepileptic agent, in treating ET. Twenty patients (mean age, 60 +/- 15 years) with ET were randomized to receive ZNS or placebo. ZNS was initiated at a dosage of 100 mg/day and escalated to 200 mg/day at day 14. Patients were evaluated by accelerometry and the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin (FTM) rating scale at baseline and days 14 and 28, as well as the Clinical Global Impression (CGI-C) scale at day 28. At endpoint, subjects assigned to ZNS were taking a mean dosage of 160 +/- 50 mg/day. There were no significant improvements in the FTM total score or its subsections. Tremor amplitude as assessed by accelerometry significantly improved in the ZNS group compared to the placebo group at endpoint relative to baseline (-0.50 +/- 0.72 vs. 0.30 +/- 0.79 m/s(2); P = 0.03). On the CGI-C, 60% (n = 6) of patients in the ZNS group felt that their tremor was unchanged, while the remaining patients felt that their tremor was "minimally improved." Thirty percent (n = 3) of patients taking ZNS discontinued the study due to side effects (fatigue, headache, paresthesias) while taking 100 mg per day. ZNS did not provide significant improvements in clinical rating scales at study endpoint compared to placebo and was only modestly well tolerated. ZNS was effective in reducing tremor amplitude as measured by accelerometry.

Anticonvulsants↗