TAG

RSS订阅

收藏本站

设为首页

当前位置:读医学网 > 医疗指南 > 心血管疾病 >

2012年ESC急性STEMI指南

发布时间:2014-05-17 16:14 类别:心血管疾病 标签:br responsible final physician 来源:丁香园

Guidelines summarize and evaluate all available evidence—at the time of the writing process—on a particular issue, with the aim of assisting physicians in selecting the best management strategies for an individual patient with a given condition, taking into account the impact on outcome, as well as the risk–benefit ratio of particular diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines are not substitutes but are complements for textbooks and cover the ESC Core Curriculum topics. Guidelines and recommendations should help physicians to make decisions in their daily practice.

However, the final decisions concerning an individual patient must be made by the responsible physician(s). A great number of guidelines have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), as well as by other societies and organizations. Because of their impact on clinical practice, quality criteria for the development of guidelines have been established, in order to make all decisions transparent to the user. The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC guidelines can be found on the ESC web site (http://www.escardio.org/guidelines-surveys/esc-guidelines/about/Pages/rules-writing.aspx). ESC guidelines represent the official position of the ESC on a given topic and are regularly updated.

Members of this Task Force were selected by the ESC to represent professionals involved with the medical care of patients with this condition. Selected experts in the field undertook a comprehensive review of the published evidence for diagnosis, management and/or prevention of a given condition, according to ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) policy. A critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures was performed, including assessment of the risk–benefit ratio. Estimates of expected health outcomes for larger populations were included, where data exist. The levels of evidence and the strengths of recommendation of particular treatment options were weighed and graded according to predefined scales,