OBJECTIVE: This technical report describes the procedures involved in developing recommendations on the management of childhood obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). METHODS: The literature from 1999 through 2011 was evaluated. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A total of 3166 titles were reviewed, of which 350 provided relevant data. Most articles were level II through IV. The prevalence of OSAS ranged from 0% to 5.7%, with obesity being an independent risk factor. OSAS was associated with cardiovascular, growth, and neurobehavioral abnormalities and possibly inflammation. Most diagnostic screening tests had low sensitivity and specificity. Treatment of OSAS resulted in improvements in behavior and attention and likely improvement in cognitive abilities. Primary treatment is adenotonsillectomy (AT). Data were insufficient to recommend specific surgical techniques; however, children undergoing partial tonsillectomy should be monitored for possible recurrence of OSAS. Although OSAS improved postoperatively, the proportion of patients who had residual OSAS ranged from 13% to 29% in low-risk populations to 73% when obese children were included and stricter polysomnographic criteria were used. Nevertheless, OSAS may improve after AT even in obese children, thus supporting surgery as a reasonable initial treatment. A significant number of obese patients required intubation or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) postoperatively, which reinforces the need for inpatient observation. CPAP was effective in the treatment of OSAS, but adherence is a major barrier. For this reason, CPAP is not recommended as first-line therapy for OSAS when AT is an option. Intranasal steroids may ameliorate mild OSAS, but follow-up is needed. Data were insufficient to recommend rapid maxillary expansion.

This clinical practice guideline is not intended as a sole source of guidance for managing adults with rhinosinusitis. Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. It is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem.

Background-Guidelines translate best evidence into best practice. A well-crafted guideline promotes quality by reducing healthcare variations, improving diagnostic accuracy, promoting effective therapy, and discouraging ineffective -or potentially harmful -interventions. Despite a plethora of published guidelines, methodology is often poorly defined and varies greatly within and among organizations.Purpose-This manual describes the principles and practices used successfully by the American Academy of Otolaryngology -Head and Neck Surgery to produce quality-driven, evidence-based guidelines using efficient and transparent methodology for action-ready recommendations with multi-disciplinary applicability. The development process, which allows moving from conception to completion in twelve months, emphasizes a logical sequence of key action statements supported by amplifying text, evidence profiles, and recommendation grades that link action to evidence.Conclusions-As clinical practice guidelines become more prominent as a key metric of quality healthcare, organizations must develop efficient production strategies that balance rigor and pragmatism. Equally important, clinicians must become savvy in understanding what guidelines are -and are not -and how they are best utilized to improve care. The information in this manual should help clinicians and organizations achieve these goals.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines are not uniformly successful in influencing clinicians' behaviour toward best practices. Implementability refers to a set of characteristics that predict ease of (and obstacles to) guideline implementation. Our objective is to develop and validate a tool for appraisal of implementability of clinical guidelines.

Despite enormous energies invested in authoring clinical practice guidelines, the quality of individual guidelines varies considerably. The Conference on Guideline Standardization (COGS) was convened in April 2002 to define a standard for guideline reporting that would promote guideline quality and facilitate implementation. Twenty-three people with expertise and experience in guideline development, dissemination, and implementation participated. A list of candidate guideline components was assembled from the Institute of Medicine Provisional Instrument for Assessing Clinical Guidelines, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, the Guideline Elements Model, and other published guideline models. In a 2-stage modified Delphi process, panelists first rated their agreement with the statement that "[Item name] is a necessary component of practice guidelines" on a 9-point scale. An individualized report was prepared for each panelist; the report summarized the panelist's rating for each item and the median and dispersion of rankings of all the panelists. In a second round, panelists separately rated necessity for validity and necessity for practical application. Items achieving a median rank of 7 or higher on either scale, with low disagreement index, were retained as necessary guideline components. Representatives of 22 organizations active in guideline development reviewed the proposed items and commented favorably. Closely related items were consolidated into 18 topics to create the COGS checklist. This checklist provides a framework to support more comprehensive documentation of practice guidelines. Most organizations that are active in guideline development found the component items to be comprehensive and to fit within their existing development methods.