@synsci/cli-darwin-x64 1.1.97 → 1.1.99

package/bin/skills/clinical-decision-support/references/clinical_decision_algorithms.md

@@ -1,604 +0,0 @@
-# Clinical Decision Algorithms Guide
-
-## Overview
-
-Clinical decision algorithms provide systematic, step-by-step guidance for diagnosis, treatment selection, and patient management. This guide covers algorithm development, validation, and visual presentation using decision trees and flowcharts.
-
-## Algorithm Design Principles
-
-### Key Components
-
-**Decision Nodes**
-- **Question/Criteria**: Clear, measurable clinical parameter
-- **Binary vs Multi-Way**: Yes/no (simple) vs multiple options (complex)
-- **Objective**: Lab value, imaging finding vs Subjective: Clinical judgment
-
-**Action Nodes**
-- **Treatment**: Specific intervention with dosing
-- **Test**: Additional diagnostic procedure
-- **Referral**: Specialist consultation, higher level of care
-- **Observation**: Watchful waiting with defined follow-up
-
-**Terminal Nodes**
-- **Outcome**: Final decision point
-- **Follow-up**: Schedule for reassessment
-- **Exit criteria**: When to exit algorithm
-
-### Design Criteria
-
-**Clarity**
-- Unambiguous decision points
-- Mutually exclusive pathways
-- No circular loops (unless intentional reassessment cycles)
-- Clear entry and exit points
-
-**Clinical Validity**
-- Evidence-based decision criteria
-- Validated cut-points for biomarkers
-- Guideline-concordant recommendations
-- Expert consensus where evidence limited
-
-**Usability**
-- Maximum 7 decision points per pathway (cognitive load)
-- Visual hierarchy (most common path highlighted)
-- Printable single-page format preferred
-- Color coding for urgency/safety
-
-**Completeness**
-- All possible scenarios covered
-- Default pathway for edge cases
-- Safety-net provisions for unusual presentations
-- Escalation criteria clearly stated
-
-## Clinical Decision Trees
-
-### Diagnostic Algorithms
-
-**Chest Pain Evaluation Algorithm**
-
-```
-Entry: Patient with chest pain
-
-├─ STEMI Criteria? (ST elevation ≥1mm in ≥2 contiguous leads)
-│  ├─ YES → Activate cath lab, aspirin 325mg, heparin, clopidogrel 600mg
-│  │        Transfer for primary PCI (goal door-to-balloon <90 minutes)
-│  └─ NO → Continue evaluation
-
-├─ High-Risk Features? (Hemodynamic instability, arrhythmia, troponin elevation)
-│  ├─ YES → Admit CCU, serial troponins, cardiology consultation
-│  │        Consider early angiography if NSTEMI
-│  └─ NO → Calculate TIMI or HEART score
-
-├─ TIMI Score 0-1 or HEART Score 0-3? (Low risk)
-│  ├─ YES → Observe 6-12 hours, serial troponins, stress test if negative
-│  │        Discharge if all negative with cardiology follow-up in 72 hours
-│  └─ NO → TIMI 2-4 or HEART 4-6 (Intermediate risk)
-
-├─ TIMI Score 2-4 or HEART Score 4-6? (Intermediate risk)
-│  ├─ YES → Admit telemetry, serial troponins, stress imaging vs CT angiography
-│  │        Medical management: Aspirin, statin, beta-blocker
-│  └─ NO → TIMI ≥5 or HEART ≥7 (High risk) → Treat as NSTEMI
-
-Decision Endpoint: Risk-stratified pathway with 30-day event rate documented
-```
-
-**Pulmonary Embolism Diagnostic Algorithm (Wells Criteria)**
-
-```
-Entry: Suspected PE
-
-Step 1: Calculate Wells Score
-  Clinical features points:
-  - Clinical signs of DVT: 3 points
-  - PE more likely than alternative diagnosis: 3 points  
-  - Heart rate >100: 1.5 points
-  - Immobilization/surgery in past 4 weeks: 1.5 points
-  - Previous PE/DVT: 1.5 points
-  - Hemoptysis: 1 point
-  - Malignancy: 1 point
-
-Step 2: Risk Stratify
-  ├─ Wells Score ≤4 (PE unlikely)
-  │  └─ D-dimer test
-  │     ├─ D-dimer negative (<500 ng/mL) → PE excluded, consider alternative diagnosis
-  │     └─ D-dimer positive (≥500 ng/mL) → CTPA
-  │
-  └─ Wells Score >4 (PE likely)
-     └─ CTPA (skip D-dimer)
-
-Step 3: CTPA Results
-  ├─ Positive for PE → Risk stratify severity
-  │  ├─ Massive PE (hypotension, shock) → Thrombolytics vs embolectomy
-  │  ├─ Submassive PE (RV strain, troponin+) → Admit ICU, consider thrombolytics
-  │  └─ Low-risk PE → Anticoagulation, consider outpatient management
-  │
-  └─ Negative for PE → PE excluded, investigate alternative diagnosis
-
-Step 4: Treatment Decision (if PE confirmed)
-  ├─ Absolute contraindication to anticoagulation?
-  │  ├─ YES → IVC filter placement, treat underlying condition
-  │  └─ NO → Anticoagulation therapy
-  │
-  ├─ Cancer-associated thrombosis?
-  │  ├─ YES → LMWH preferred (edoxaban alternative)
-  │  └─ NO → DOAC preferred (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban)
-  │
-  └─ Duration: Minimum 3 months, extended if unprovoked or recurrent
-```
-
-### Treatment Selection Algorithms
-
-**NSCLC First-Line Treatment Algorithm**
-
-```
-Entry: Advanced/Metastatic NSCLC, adequate PS (ECOG 0-2)
-
-Step 1: Biomarker Testing Complete?
-  ├─ NO → Reflex testing: EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, PD-L1, consider NGS
-  │       Hold systemic therapy pending results (unless rapidly progressive)
-  └─ YES → Proceed to Step 2
-
-Step 2: Actionable Genomic Alteration?
-  ├─ EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R → Osimertinib 80mg daily
-  │  └─ Alternative: Erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib (less preferred)
-  │
-  ├─ ALK rearrangement → Alectinib 600mg BID
-  │  └─ Alternatives: Brigatinib, lorlatinib, crizotinib (less preferred)
-  │
-  ├─ ROS1 rearrangement → Crizotinib 250mg BID or entrectinib
-  │
-  ├─ BRAF V600E → Dabrafenib + trametinib
-  │
-  ├─ MET exon 14 skipping → Capmatinib or tepotinib
-  │
-  ├─ RET rearrangement → Selpercatinib or pralsetinib
-  │
-  ├─ NTRK fusion → Larotrectinib or entrectinib
-  │
-  ├─ KRAS G12C → Sotorasib or adagrasib (if no other options)
-  │
-  └─ NO actionable alteration → Proceed to Step 3
-
-Step 3: PD-L1 Testing Result?
-  ├─ PD-L1 ≥50% (TPS)
-  │  ├─ Option 1: Pembrolizumab 200mg Q3W (monotherapy, NCCN Category 1)
-  │  ├─ Option 2: Pembrolizumab + platinum doublet chemotherapy
-  │  └─ Option 3: Atezolizumab + bevacizumab + carboplatin + paclitaxel
-  │
-  ├─ PD-L1 1-49% (TPS)
-  │  ├─ Preferred: Pembrolizumab + platinum doublet chemotherapy
-  │  └─ Alternative: Platinum doublet chemotherapy alone
-  │
-  └─ PD-L1 <1% (TPS)
-     ├─ Preferred: Pembrolizumab + platinum doublet chemotherapy
-     └─ Alternative: Platinum doublet chemotherapy ± bevacizumab
-
-Step 4: Platinum Doublet Selection (if applicable)
-  ├─ Squamous histology
-  │  └─ Carboplatin AUC 6 + paclitaxel 200 mg/m² Q3W (4 cycles)
-  │      or Carboplatin AUC 5 + nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m² D1,8,15 Q4W
-  │
-  └─ Non-squamous histology  
-     └─ Carboplatin AUC 6 + pemetrexed 500 mg/m² Q3W (4 cycles)
-         Continue pemetrexed maintenance if responding
-         Add bevacizumab 15 mg/kg if eligible (no hemoptysis, brain mets)
-
-Step 5: Monitoring and Response Assessment
-  - Imaging every 6 weeks for first 12 weeks, then every 9 weeks
-  - Continue until progression or unacceptable toxicity
-  - At progression, proceed to second-line algorithm
-```
-
-**Heart Failure Management Algorithm (AHA/ACC Guidelines)**
-
-```
-Entry: Heart Failure Diagnosis Confirmed
-
-Step 1: Determine HF Type
-  ├─ HFrEF (EF ≤40%)
-  │  └─ Proceed to Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy (GDMT)
-  │
-  ├─ HFpEF (EF ≥50%)
-  │  └─ Treat comorbidities, diuretics for congestion, consider SGLT2i
-  │
-  └─ HFmrEF (EF 41-49%)
-     └─ Consider HFrEF GDMT, evidence less robust
-
-Step 2: GDMT for HFrEF (All patients unless contraindicated)
-
-Quadruple Therapy (Class 1 recommendations):
-
-1. ACE Inhibitor/ARB/ARNI
-   ├─ Preferred: Sacubitril-valsartan 49/51mg BID → titrate to 97/103mg BID
-   │  └─ If ACE-I naïve or taking <10mg enalapril equivalent
-   ├─ Alternative: ACE-I (enalapril, lisinopril, ramipril) to target dose
-   └─ Alternative: ARB (losartan, valsartan) if ACE-I intolerant
-
-2. Beta-Blocker (start low, titrate slowly)
-   ├─ Bisoprolol 1.25mg daily → 10mg daily target
-   ├─ Metoprolol succinate 12.5mg daily → 200mg daily target
-   └─ Carvedilol 3.125mg BID → 25mg BID target (50mg BID if >85kg)
-
-3. Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist (MRA)
-   ├─ Spironolactone 12.5-25mg daily → 50mg daily target
-   └─ Eplerenone 25mg daily → 50mg daily target
-   └─ Contraindications: K >5.0, CrCl <30 mL/min
-
-4. SGLT2 Inhibitor (regardless of diabetes status)
-   ├─ Dapagliflozin 10mg daily
-   └─ Empagliflozin 10mg daily
-
-Step 3: Additional Therapies Based on Phenotype
-
-├─ Sinus rhythm + HR ≥70 despite beta-blocker?
-│  └─ YES: Add ivabradine 5mg BID → 7.5mg BID target
-│
-├─ African American + NYHA III-IV?
-│  └─ YES: Add hydralazine 37.5mg TID + isosorbide dinitrate 20mg TID
-│           (Target: hydralazine 75mg TID + ISDN 40mg TID)
-│
-├─ Atrial fibrillation?
-│  ├─ Rate control (target <80 bpm at rest, <110 bpm with activity)
-│  └─ Anticoagulation (DOAC preferred, warfarin if valvular)
-│
-└─ Iron deficiency (ferritin <100 or <300 with TSAT <20%)?
-   └─ YES: IV iron supplementation (ferric carboxymaltose)
-
-Step 4: Device Therapy Evaluation
-
-├─ EF ≤35%, NYHA II-III, LBBB with QRS ≥150 ms, sinus rhythm?
-│  └─ YES: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D)
-│
-├─ EF ≤35%, NYHA II-III, on GDMT ≥3 months?
-│  └─ YES: ICD for primary prevention
-│           (if life expectancy >1 year with good functional status)
-│
-└─ EF ≤35%, NYHA IV despite GDMT, or advanced HF?
-   └─ Refer to advanced HF specialist
-      ├─ LVAD evaluation
-      ├─ Heart transplant evaluation
-      └─ Palliative care consultation
-
-Step 5: Monitoring and Titration
-
-Weekly to biweekly visits during titration:
-- Blood pressure (target SBP ≥90 mmHg)
-- Heart rate (target 50-60 bpm)
-- Potassium (target 4.0-5.0 mEq/L, hold MRA if >5.5)
-- Creatinine (expect 10-20% increase, acceptable if <30% and stable)
-- Symptoms and congestion status (daily weights, NYHA class)
-
-Stable on GDMT:
-- Visits every 3-6 months
-- Echocardiogram at 3-6 months after GDMT optimization, then annually
-- NT-proBNP or BNP trending (biomarker-guided therapy investigational)
-```
-
-## Risk Stratification Tools
-
-### Cardiovascular Risk Scores
-
-**TIMI Risk Score (NSTEMI/Unstable Angina)**
-
-```
-Score Calculation (0-7 points):
-☐ Age ≥65 years (1 point)
-☐ ≥3 cardiac risk factors (HTN, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, smoking, family history) (1)
-☐ Known CAD (stenosis ≥50%) (1)
-☐ ASA use in past 7 days (1)
-☐ Severe angina (≥2 episodes in 24 hours) (1)
-☐ ST deviation ≥0.5 mm (1)
-☐ Elevated cardiac biomarkers (1)
-
-Risk Stratification:
-├─ Score 0-1: 5% risk of death/MI/urgent revasc at 14 days (Low)
-│  └─ Management: Observation, stress test, outpatient follow-up
-│
-├─ Score 2: 8% risk (Low-intermediate)
-│  └─ Management: Admission, medical therapy, stress imaging
-│
-├─ Score 3-4: 13-20% risk (Intermediate-high)
-│  └─ Management: Admission, aggressive medical therapy, early invasive strategy
-│
-└─ Score 5-7: 26-41% risk (High)
-   └─ Management: Aggressive treatment, urgent angiography (<24 hours)
-```
-
-**CHA2DS2-VASc Score (Stroke Risk in Atrial Fibrillation)**
-
-```
-Score Calculation:
-☐ Congestive heart failure (1 point)
-☐ Hypertension (1)
-☐ Age ≥75 years (2)
-☐ Diabetes mellitus (1)
-☐ Prior stroke/TIA/thromboembolism (2)
-☐ Vascular disease (MI, PAD, aortic plaque) (1)
-☐ Age 65-74 years (1)
-☐ Sex category (female) (1)
-
-Maximum score: 9 points
-
-Treatment Algorithm:
-├─ Score 0 (male) or 1 (female): 0-1.3% annual stroke risk
-│  └─ No anticoagulation or aspirin (Class IIb)
-│
-├─ Score 1 (male): 1.3% annual stroke risk
-│  └─ Consider anticoagulation (Class IIa)
-│      Factors: Patient preference, bleeding risk, comorbidities
-│
-└─ Score ≥2 (male) or ≥3 (female): ≥2.2% annual stroke risk
-   └─ Anticoagulation recommended (Class I)
-      ├─ Preferred: DOAC (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, dabigatran)
-      └─ Alternative: Warfarin (INR 2-3) if DOAC contraindicated
-
-Bleeding Risk Assessment (HAS-BLED):
-H - Hypertension (SBP >160)
-A - Abnormal renal/liver function (1 point each)
-S - Stroke history
-B - Bleeding history or predisposition
-L - Labile INR (if on warfarin)
-E - Elderly (age >65)
-D - Drugs (antiplatelet, NSAIDs) or alcohol (1 point each)
-
-HAS-BLED ≥3: High bleeding risk → Modifiable factors, consider DOAC over warfarin
-```
-
-### Oncology Risk Calculators
-
-**MELD Score (Hepatocellular Carcinoma Eligibility)**
-
-```
-MELD = 3.78×ln(bilirubin mg/dL) + 11.2×ln(INR) + 9.57×ln(creatinine mg/dL) + 6.43
-
-Interpretation:
-├─ MELD <10: 1.9% 3-month mortality (Low)
-│  └─ Consider resection or ablation for HCC
-│
-├─ MELD 10-19: 6-20% 3-month mortality (Moderate)
-│  └─ Transplant evaluation if within Milan criteria
-│      Milan: Single ≤5cm or ≤3 lesions each ≤3cm, no vascular invasion
-│
-├─ MELD 20-29: 20-45% 3-month mortality (High)
-│  └─ Urgent transplant evaluation, bridge therapy (TACE, ablation)
-│
-└─ MELD ≥30: 50-70% 3-month mortality (Very high)
-   └─ Transplant vs palliative care discussion
-      Too ill for transplant if MELD >35-40 typically
-```
-
-**Adjuvant! Online (Breast Cancer Recurrence Risk)**
-
-```
-Input Variables:
-- Age at diagnosis
-- Tumor size
-- Tumor grade (1-3)
-- ER status
-- Node status (0, 1-3, 4-9, ≥10)
-- HER2 status
-- Comorbidity index
-
-Output: 10-year risk of:
-- Recurrence
-- Breast cancer mortality
-- Overall mortality
-
-Treatment Benefit Estimates:
-- Chemotherapy: Absolute reduction in recurrence
-- Endocrine therapy: Absolute reduction in recurrence
-- Trastuzumab: Absolute reduction (if HER2+)
-
-Clinical Application:
-├─ Low risk (<10% recurrence): Consider endocrine therapy alone if ER+
-├─ Intermediate risk (10-20%): Chemotherapy discussion, genomic assay
-│  └─ Oncotype DX score <26: Endocrine therapy alone
-│  └─ Oncotype DX score ≥26: Chemotherapy + endocrine therapy
-└─ High risk (>20%): Chemotherapy + endocrine therapy if ER+
-```
-
-## TikZ Flowchart Best Practices
-
-### Visual Design Principles
-
-**Node Styling**
-```latex
-% Decision nodes (diamond)
-\tikzstyle{decision} = [diamond, draw, fill=yellow!20, text width=4.5em, text centered, inner sep=0pt]
-
-% Process nodes (rectangle)
-\tikzstyle{process} = [rectangle, draw, fill=blue!20, text width=5em, text centered, rounded corners, minimum height=3em]
-
-% Terminal nodes (rounded rectangle)
-\tikzstyle{terminal} = [rectangle, draw, fill=green!20, text width=5em, text centered, rounded corners=1em, minimum height=3em]
-
-% Input/Output (parallelogram)
-\tikzstyle{io} = [trapezium, draw, fill=purple!20, text width=5em, text centered, minimum height=3em]
-```
-
-**Color Coding by Urgency**
-- **Red**: Life-threatening, immediate action required
-- **Orange**: Urgent, action within hours
-- **Yellow**: Semi-urgent, action within 24-48 hours
-- **Green**: Routine, stable clinical situation
-- **Blue**: Informational, monitoring only
-
-**Pathway Emphasis**
-- Bold arrows for most common pathway
-- Dashed arrows for rare scenarios
-- Arrow thickness proportional to pathway frequency
-- Highlight boxes around critical decision points
-
-### LaTeX TikZ Template
-
-```latex
-\documentclass{article}
-\usepackage{tikz}
-\usetikzlibrary{shapes, arrows, positioning}
-
-\begin{document}
-
-\tikzstyle{decision} = [diamond, draw, fill=yellow!20, text width=4em, text centered, inner sep=2pt, font=\small]
-\tikzstyle{process} = [rectangle, draw, fill=blue!20, text width=6em, text centered, rounded corners, minimum height=2.5em, font=\small]
-\tikzstyle{terminal} = [rectangle, draw, fill=green!20, text width=6em, text centered, rounded corners=8pt, minimum height=2.5em, font=\small]
-\tikzstyle{alert} = [rectangle, draw=red, line width=1.5pt, fill=red!10, text width=6em, text centered, rounded corners, minimum height=2.5em, font=\small\bfseries]
-\tikzstyle{arrow} = [thick,->,>=stealth]
-
-\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=2cm, auto]
-    % Nodes
-    \node [terminal] (start) {Patient presents with symptom X};
-    \node [decision, below of=start] (decision1) {Criterion A met?};
-    \node [alert, below of=decision1, node distance=2.5cm] (alert1) {Immediate action};
-    \node [process, right of=decision1, node distance=4cm] (process1) {Standard evaluation};
-    \node [terminal, below of=process1, node distance=2.5cm] (end) {Outcome};
-    
-    % Arrows
-    \draw [arrow] (start) -- (decision1);
-    \draw [arrow] (decision1) -- node {Yes} (alert1);
-    \draw [arrow] (decision1) -- node {No} (process1);
-    \draw [arrow] (process1) -- (end);
-    \draw [arrow] (alert1) -| (end);
-\end{tikzpicture}
-
-\end{document}
-```
-
-## Algorithm Validation
-
-### Development Process
-
-**Step 1: Literature Review and Evidence Synthesis**
-- Systematic review of guidelines (NCCN, ASCO, ESMO, AHA/ACC)
-- Meta-analyses of clinical trials
-- Expert consensus statements
-- Local practice patterns and resource availability
-
-**Step 2: Draft Algorithm Development**
-- Multidisciplinary team input (physicians, nurses, pharmacists)
-- Define decision nodes and criteria
-- Specify actions and outcomes
-- Identify areas of uncertainty
-
-**Step 3: Pilot Testing**
-- Retrospective application to historical cases (n=20-50)
-- Identify scenarios not covered by algorithm
-- Refine decision criteria
-- Usability testing with end-users
-
-**Step 4: Prospective Validation**
-- Implement in clinical practice with data collection
-- Track adherence rate (target >80%)
-- Monitor outcomes vs historical controls
-- User satisfaction surveys
-
-**Step 5: Continuous Quality Improvement**
-- Quarterly review of algorithm performance
-- Update based on new evidence
-- Address deviations and reasons for non-adherence
-- Version control and change documentation
-
-### Performance Metrics
-
-**Process Metrics**
-- Algorithm adherence rate (% cases following algorithm)
-- Time to decision (median time from presentation to treatment start)
-- Completion rate (% cases reaching terminal node)
-
-**Outcome Metrics**
-- Appropriateness of care (concordance with guidelines)
-- Clinical outcomes (mortality, morbidity, readmissions)
-- Resource utilization (length of stay, unnecessary tests)
-- Safety (adverse events, errors)
-
-**User Experience Metrics**
-- Ease of use (Likert scale survey)
-- Time to use (median time to navigate algorithm)
-- Perceived utility (% users reporting algorithm helpful)
-- Barriers to use (qualitative feedback)
-
-## Implementation Strategies
-
-### Integration into Clinical Workflow
-
-**Electronic Health Record Integration**
-- Clinical decision support (CDS) alerts at key decision points
-- Order sets linked to algorithm pathways
-- Auto-population of risk scores from EHR data
-- Documentation templates following algorithm structure
-
-**Point-of-Care Tools**
-- Pocket cards for quick reference
-- Mobile apps with interactive algorithms
-- Wall posters in clinical areas
-- QR codes linking to full algorithm
-
-**Education and Training**
-- Didactic presentation of algorithm rationale
-- Case-based exercises
-- Simulation scenarios
-- Audit and feedback on adherence
-
-### Overcoming Barriers
-
-**Common Barriers**
-- Algorithm complexity (too many decision points)
-- Lack of awareness (not disseminated effectively)
-- Disagreement with recommendations (perceived as cookbook medicine)
-- Competing priorities (time pressure, multiple patients)
-- Resource limitations (recommended tests/treatments not available)
-
-**Mitigation Strategies**
-- Simplify algorithms (≤7 decision points per pathway preferred)
-- Champion network (local opinion leaders promoting algorithm)
-- Customize to local context (allow flexibility for clinical judgment)
-- Measure and report outcomes (demonstrate value)
-- Provide resources (ensure algorithm-recommended options available)
-
-## Algorithm Maintenance and Updates
-
-### Version Control
-
-**Change Log Documentation**
-```
-Algorithm: NSCLC First-Line Treatment
-Version: 3.2
-Effective Date: January 1, 2024
-Previous Version: 3.1 (effective July 1, 2023)
-
-Changes in Version 3.2:
-1. Added KRAS G12C-mutated pathway (sotorasib, adagrasib)
-   - Evidence: FDA approval May 2021/2022
-   - Guideline: NCCN v4.2023
-
-2. Updated PD-L1 ≥50% recommendation to include pembrolizumab monotherapy as Option 1
-   - Evidence: KEYNOTE-024 5-year follow-up
-   - Guideline: NCCN Category 1 preferred
-
-3. Removed crizotinib as preferred ALK inhibitor, moved to alternative
-   - Evidence: ALEX, CROWN trials showing superiority of alectinib, lorlatinib
-   - Guideline: NCCN/ESMO Category 1 for alectinib as first-line
-
-Reviewed by: Thoracic Oncology Committee
-Approved by: Dr. [Name], Medical Director
-Next Review Date: July 1, 2024
-```
-
-### Trigger for Updates
-
-**Mandatory Updates (Within 3 Months)**
-- FDA approval of new drug for algorithm indication
-- Guideline change (NCCN, ASCO, ESMO Category 1 recommendation)
-- Safety alert or black box warning added to recommended agent
-- Major clinical trial results changing standard of care
-
-**Routine Updates (Annually)**
-- Minor evidence updates
-- Optimization based on local performance data
-- Formatting or usability improvements
-- Addition of new clinical scenarios encountered
-
-**Emergency Updates (Within 1 Week)**
-- Drug shortage requiring alternative pathways
-- Drug recall or safety withdrawal
-- Outbreak or pandemic requiring modified protocols
-