· systematically test, critically review data yielded, and analyze

·        
Briefly
explain your search strategy.

Utilization of various internet,
textbook and journals searches. Esurance of only access and refer to peer
reviewed, reputable sources and none greater than 5 years in circulation.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

·        
Who
developed the guideline?

The guideline, The Diagnosis and Management of Otitis
Media, was developed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and endorsed by
the American Academy of Family Physicians (APA, 2013). (It applies to otherwise
healthy children 6 months through 12 years of age)

·        
Is
this a revision of a previous guideline or an original? What is the date of
publication?

Original guideline written November
2003 and endorsed by APA in July 2013

·        
Explain
the concept of “systematic review of current best evidence.”

A systematic
review is a summary of the medical literature that uses explicit
and reproducible techniques to systematically test, critically review data
yielded, and analyze on a specific issue. Researchers conducting such reviews use previously peer approved specific
systematic approaches aimed at minimizing bias, in order to produce more
reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making (Neinstein,
et. Al., 2016). Systematic reviews are also a type of journal article,
published alongside primary research articles in scholarly journals.

·        
How
was conflict of interest managed in the development of these guidelines?

Professional expectations dictate that clinical practice
guidelines are based on credible scientific evidence, well developed evaluation
of evidence, and un-biased professional judgment that relates the evidence to
the needs of practitioners and patients (IOM, 2009). Arguably, the most compelling
issue in the development of clinical practice guidelines is the absence of well
researched yielded evidence that can be utilized to develop at bedside practices.
Through professional collaboration and respect for collegial idealism and
expertise, any conflict of interest issue can be resolved.

·        
How
is quality of evidence defined?

In 2014 the Grading of Recommendations Assessment,
Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group presented its initial proposal
for patient management.  GRADE provides a
specific definition for
the quality of evidence in
the context of making recommendations. The quality of evidence reflects the extent to which confidence
in an estimate of the effect is adequate to support a particular recommendation
(Atkins, et. al., 2014).

·        
Explain
differences among strong recommendation, recommendation, and option.

The strength of a recommendation indicates the
extent to which one can be confident that adherence to the recommendation will
do more good than harm. The steps in ascertaining strength of evidence and ability to make
judgment to use recommendations include:

·        
The quality of evidence being tested compared with prior
comparable studies or evidence.

·        
The quality of evidence effect on critical outcomes

·        
The balance between benefits and harms

·        
The strength of recommendations versus option

Once the validity of the evidence is
ascertained, the user can decide whether to strongly recommend vs only present
as option. The recommendation also depends on intended use and application to
situations; thus, use is at discretion of user.

 

·        
What
are “key Action statements?”

Key action statements are fundamental aspect of the
development process, which allows moving from conception to completion in a
designated timeframe, emphasizes a logical sequence of indispensable actions supported by an augment
documentation, profiles evidence, and makes recommendation grades that
link action to
evidence (IOM, 2009). Key action statements should be clear and precise to
avoid inconsistent interpretation and prevent inappropriate practice variation.

·        
For
this particular child, what are the specific treatment recommendations
including any diagnostics, medications (include exact dosage, frequency, length
of treatment), follow-up, referral, prevention, and pain control.

ü  Amoxicillin 80-90 mg/kg/day PO (maximum 3 g/24h)
divided BID for 5-7d; 10d may be required if illness is severe (Amoxicillin-clavulanate has a broader spectrum than
amoxicillin and may be a better initial antibiotic. However, because of cost
and adverse effects, the APA has deemed amoxicillin as first-line AOM
treatment) (APA, 2013 and Burns, et. al., 2017).

ü  Acetaminophen 15mg/kg every 6 hours
as needed for pain/fever (alternate with ibuprofen) (APA, 2013).

ü  Ibuprofen 10mg/kg every 6 hours as
needed for pain/fever (alternate with acetaminophen) (APA, 2013).

ü  No referral required at this, will
consider ENT if AOM develops reoccurring pattern

ü  Follow up in 2 weeks; sooner of
needed