Draft Report on Screening for Thyroid Disease Published

Draft Report on Screening for Thyroid Disease Published

A draft report on Screening for Thyroid Disease has now been published for the UK National Screening Committee.

The report has been compiled by Dr Gail Pittam, Snr Researcher; Dr Martin Allaby, Consultant in Public Health Medicine and Dr Suzi Coles, Specialty Registrar in Public Health.

For more information go to: thyroiduk.org.uk/tuk/news.h...

13 Replies

oldestnewest
  • Quote from the report :

    "There is a lack of consensus about the TSH cut-off value or values for defining which patients should receive treatment, and what constitutes a normal TSH level is still a matter of debate (British Thyroid Association and the British Thyroid Foundation 2011)."

    Seriously? Is this actually true? Are they now questioning their own guidelines - or have I missed something somewhere?

    Jane x

  • That is how I read it too. This may relate to the fact that there are some doctors who will treat before TSH gets to 10 and they are still working on getting them to tow the line. I hope that isn't the case and that they are actually looking into changing the guidelines. It would be quite an exciting change if that is the case :)

  • Quite agree. It's a very heartening thought. Jane x

  • They have the same error which was in the 2006 TFT Guidelines. The units of the FT3 test should be in pmol/L not nmol/L.

    Serum reference ranges

    TSH 0.4-4.5 mlU/L

    FT4 9.0-25 pmol/L TT4 60-160 nmol/L

    FT3 3.5 – 7.8 nmol/L TT3 1.2 – 2.6 nmol/L

    Silky x

  • So they do! Oh dear, what an error to make! According to them, free t3 would be higher than total t3! Oops!

    This is why people shouldn't copy other people! I keep telling the kids at school that :D

  • If you look at the version on the ACB site, that no longer has that error. The retired Dr Beastall was flabbergasted that the document could have such an error after the scrutiny it received and being in use for over six years. He was as good as his word in getting it updated. But there is nothing about the document which identifies that is has been updated. And other sites still carry the original version!

    I do not see how a guideline document can carry the weight of authority when it has not been reviewed in accordance with its own statement, when there is no formal means of getting errors and omissions corrected, when there is no proper declaration of interests from all involved, and when there is so little document control that at least two different versions are simultaneously extant.

  • Has Thyroid UK asked to be a stakeholder organisation?

  • Thanks for the update Lyn.

    They screen at birth

    - why not at puberty, pregnancy, menopause or after quitting smoking? Because they'd find an epidemic!

    Good excuse 'tho (and an admittal) that the TSH test is questionable. J :D

  • Helvella makes a really good point about TUK becoming a stakeholder organisation. it is really important to be one in order to get the right facts across. On VERY quick reading I can see that the authors have only looked in one area and do not appear to be aware of different points of view. it is essential that TUK is a stakeholder to provide a proper balance and revise this draft document. Or at least send the authors some better information and an alternative point of view.

  • It is a draft for Consultation after all.

  • It invites comment without qualifying by whom - so I think any sensible contribution should be acceptable. However, if stakeholder-hood is achievable (i.e. they let TUK in), then that would be a "good thing".

  • Hear Hear!

  • Plus, our medical advisors response is GREAT.

You may also like...