Guidelines and Resources

View the latest CHEST Guidelines and Consensus Statements.

CHEST Guidelines and Consensus Statements

Guidelines & Resources

CHEST strives to be the leading resource in clinical practice guideline development and seeks to disseminate these guidelines to provide clinicians essential, up-to-date information at the point of care. In this effort and as applicable, CHEST will employ the innovative "living guidelines" model, which responds to the need for timely, targeted guideline updates when new, relevant evidence becomes available.

CHEST Guideline Topic Areas

To provide needed clinical guidance in chest medicine, CHEST has developed guideline publications and clinician tools and materials in the following portfolio of key topic areas:

View all CHEST Guidelines

About CHEST Guidelines

Membership surveys confirm that CHEST guidelines are one of the top member benefits and a major reason for joining. CHEST guidelines are used throughout the world and across many medical specialties. These and other guidelines represent a significant effort to facilitate the translation of quality evidence into clinically relevant interventions to improve patient-focused care and outcomes. CHEST guidelines inform the clinical decisions that must be jointly made by physicians and patients in developing diagnostic, treatment, and management plans so that they can enhance the benefits and reduce the harms associated with various options. Comprehensive guidelines such as these are intended for a multidisciplinary readership, including primary care, medical, and surgical specialists, plus nursing and allied health professionals.

Guideline Disclaimer:
The evidence-based practice guidelines published by The American College of Chest Physicians ("CHEST") incorporate data obtained from a comprehensive and systematic literature review of the most recent studies available at the time. Guidelines are intended for general information only, are not medical advice, and do not replace professional medical care and physician advice, which always should be sought for any specific condition. Furthermore, guidelines may not be complete or accurate because new studies that have been published too late in the process of guideline development or after publication are not incorporated into any particular guideline before it is disseminated. CHEST and its officers, regents, governors, executive committee, members, and employees (the "CHEST Parties") disclaim all liability for the accuracy or completeness of a guideline and disclaim all warranties, express or implied. Guideline users always are urged to seek out newer information that might impact the diagnostic and treatment recommendations contained within a guideline. The CHEST Parties further disclaim all liability for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, direct, indirect, incidental, punitive, or consequential damages) arising out of the use, inability to use, or the results of use of a guideline, any references used in a guideline, or the materials, information, or procedures contained in a guideline, based on any legal theory whatsoever and whether or not there was advice on the possibility of such damages. 

Through a comprehensive and systematic literature review, CHEST evidence-based clinical practice guidelines incorporate data from the existing peer-reviewed literature. This literature meets the prespecified inclusion criteria for the clinical research question, which CHEST considers, at the time of publication, to be the best evidence available for general clinical information purposes. This evidence is of varying quality from original studies of varying methodological rigor. CHEST recommends that performance measures for quality improvement, performance-based reimbursement, and public reporting purposes should be based on rigorously developed guideline recommendations. However, not all recommendations graded highly according to the CHEST grading system are necessarily appropriate for development into such performance measures, and each one should be analyzed individually for importance, feasibility, usability, and scientific acceptability (National Quality Forum criteria). Performance measures developers should exercise caution in basing measures on recommendations that are graded as weak or low evidence, according to the CHEST Grading System as these should generally not be used in performance measures for quality improvement, performance-based reimbursement, and public reporting purposes.

  1. Guyatt G, Gutterman D, Baumann M, et al. Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical guidelines: report from an American College of Chest Physicians task force. Chest. 2006;129(1):174-181.