SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Practice Guideline”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

PubMed2003

[The Dutch College of General Practitioners' practice guideline 'Diagnosis of breast cancer': reaction from the field of general practice].

In the revised practice guideline on the diagnosis of breast cancer, the general practitioner has an important role when, during screening, a woman is found to have an abnormality, before, during and after treatment. Breast clinics allow the situation to be dealt with rapidly, but patients also need time to cope with it all. In young women with breast complaints, but without palpable abnormalities, the practice guideline recommends mammography to be on the safe side. However, in a group with a low prevalence, this carries primarily disadvantages; the patient does need to be properly followed. The policy for patients with a positive family history of breast cancer has been clearly worded.

Female↗

PubMed2003

[Clinical practice guidelines in Japan: toward their appropriate use and diffusion].

In Japan, the governmental report on health technology assessment in 1999 referred to the need to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. The Ministry of Health and Welfare established priorities for the development of clinical practice guidelines, and started several projects. About 20 clinical practice guidelines are to be developed by 2004. However, what "guideline" means and how "guidelines" work are unclear because the word "guideline" is ambiguous in Japan. Although it is generally accepted that "directives are stronger than recommendations, which are stronger than guidelines" in the western countries, Japanese people do not usually recognize these distinctions and tend to regard guidelines as mandatory directives even in individual cases. Patients, consumers and legal professionals may overestimate the authority of clinical practice guidelines when they see them. What clinical practice guidelines are, or are not should be clarified appropriately. Autumn 2003, the Japan Council for Quality Health Care will open the information service that provides practice guidelines and related literature. This will be accessible to both healthcare professionals and the general public. Much remains to be done to bring other stakeholders to the table. All of Japanese society can, and needs to, participate in the process of developing a consensus on clinical practice guidelines.

Community Participation↗

PubMed1994

Clinical practice guidelines and critical paths--roadmaps to quality, cost-effective care (Part I).

Clinical practice guidelines and critical paths have gained widespread acceptance in recent years. Part I of this article will examine clinical practice guidelines, or practice parameters, and their application to patient care. Part II (in the February issue of JAHIMA) will look at multi-disciplinary care plans known as critical paths and how they can incorporate clinical practice guidelines. Health information management professionals can play an important role in implementation and ongoing evaluation of these clinical tools.

Clinical Protocols↗

PubMed2000

A comparison of clinical practice guideline appraisal instruments.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and compare clinical practice guideline appraisal instruments. METHODS: Appraisal instruments, defined as instruments intended to be used for guideline evaluation, were identified by searching MEDLINE (1966-99) using the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) practice guidelines, reviewing bibliographies of the retrieved articles, and contacting authors of guideline appraisal instruments. Two reviewers independently examined the questions/statements from all the instruments and thematically grouped them. The 44 groupings were collapsed into 10 guideline attributes. Using the items, two reviewers independently undertook a content analysis of the instruments. RESULTS: Fifteen instruments were identified, and two were excluded because they were not focused on evaluation. All instruments were developed after 1992 and contained 8 to 142 questions/statements. Of the 44 items used for the content analysis, the number of items covered by each instrument ranged from 6 to 34. Only the instrument by Cluzeau and colleagues included at least one item for each of the 10 attributes, and it addressed 28 of the 44 items. This instrument and that of Shaneyfelt et al. are the only instruments that have so far been validated. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive, concise, and valid instrument could help users systematically judge the quality and utility of clinical practice guidelines. The current instruments vary widely in length and comprehensiveness. There is insufficient evidence to support the exclusive use of any one instrument, although the Cluzeau instrument has received the greatest evaluation. More research is required on the reliability and validity of existing guideline appraisal instruments before any one instrument can become widely adopted.

Humans↗

PubMed2005

[Are the guidelines guiding us reliable? Evaluation of the Spanish clinical practice guidelines].

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a large proliferation of clinical practice guidelines (CPG), there being doubts on inconsistencies between the recommendations made and internal incongruencies, that affect the role of the guidelines as instruments helping the clinicians. This study aims to analyze the quality of a group of Spanish CPG and to assess the feasibility of use and consistency of the AGREE Instrument in its Spanish version, designed to evaluate the CPG. METHOD: A total of 278 CPG produced in Spain between January 1990 and December 2002 were identified. The originals of 61 guidelines were recovered from their authors and passed to the AGREE Instrument independently by four raters. Quality of the guidelines feasibility and reproducibility of AGREE were analyzed. RESULTS: For all the attributes of AGREE except in the editorial independence, more than 60% of the guidelines evaluated obtained a poor quality score, there being no domain in which more than 10% of the guidelines was excellent. The worst grading areas are those of applicability, participation and rigour of development of the guidelines. Of the 61 guidelines evaluated, the reviewers graded 25 as "very poor quality", 26 as "non recommendable" and 6 and 4 as "recommendable" or "highly recommendable", respectively. Interrater consistency was high. CONCLUSIONS: The mean quality of the Spanish guidelines evaluated is very low. The AGREE Instrument in its Spanish version is consistent for the Spanish guidelines and easy to use.

Humans↗

PubMed2003

Status of practice guidelines in the United States: CDC guidelines as an example.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines have proliferated in the past several decades, starting with only a handful in the 1980s to over 1000 approved through The National Guideline Clearinghouse in 2002. METHODS: The purposes of this article to review research related to guideline adoption and impact and to make recommendations for assessing the outcomes of guidelines, using the CDC guideline process as an example. RESULTS: Despite the national movement toward standardization of evidence-based practice, few studies have been conducted to assess the costs of guideline development and implementation, and some practice guidelines have been implemented without concomitant assessment on patient outcomes and costs and benefits of changes in care. CONCLUSIONS: An immediate mandate is to ensure that when guidelines are promulgated, they include an evaluation plan, developed by the implementer of the guideline, which takes advantage of existing qualitative and quantitative data and programs (e.g., patient-centered care, quality assurance, risk management) not limited to expensive and sophisticated clinical trials.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.↗

PubMed2002

Practice guidelines in mental health and addiction services: contributions from the American College of Mental Health Administration.

Practice guidelines have proliferated in mental health and addiction services; more than 40 organizations have developed guidelines in the field. However, much confusion, controversy, and contextual issues remain, particularly regarding effective dissemination and the clinical, financial, political, and ethical issues that emerge when evidence-based behavioral health practice guidelines are implemented in systems of care. The American College of Mental Health Administration (ACMHA) focused on these problems in their 1999 and 2000 Santa Fe Summits and produced a number of specific outcomes that contribute to thinking in the field. These include the following: (a) a taxonomy of building blocks for informed decision-making in behavioral health assessment and treatment; (b) a paradigm for the development of practice guidelines; (c) characteristics of a good practice guideline; (d) strategies for disseminating and implementing practice guidelines; and (e) areas in need of future research.

Algorithms↗

PubMed1999

Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement.

CONTEXT: Despite wide promulgation, clinical practice guidelines have had limited effect on changing physician behavior. Little is known about the process and factors involved in changing physician practices in response to guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To review barriers to physician adherence to clinical practice guidelines. DATA SOURCES: We searched the MEDLINE, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), and HealthSTAR databases (January 1966 to January 1998); bibliographies; textbooks on health behavior or public health; and references supplied by experts to find English-language article titles that describe barriers to guideline adherence. STUDY SELECTION: Of 5658 articles initially identified, we selected 76 published studies describing at least 1 barrier to adherence to clinical practice guidelines, practice parameters, clinical policies, or national consensus statements. One investigator screened titles to identify candidate articles, then 2 investigators independently reviewed the texts to exclude articles that did not match the criteria. Differences were resolved by consensus with a third investigator. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators organized barriers to adherence into a framework according to their effect on physician knowledge, attitudes, or behavior. This organization was validated by 3 additional investigators. DATA SYNTHESIS: The 76 articles included 120 different surveys investigating 293 potential barriers to physician guideline adherence, including awareness (n = 46), familiarity(n = 31), agreement (n = 33), self-efficacy (n = 19), outcome expectancy (n = 8), ability to overcome the inertia of previous practice (n = 14), and absence of external barriers to perform recommendations (n = 34). The majority of surveys (70 [58%] of 120) examined only 1 type of barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Studies on improving physician guideline adherence may not be generalizable, since barriers in one setting may not be present in another. Our review offers a differential diagnosis for why physicians do not follow practice guidelines, as well as a rational approach toward improving guideline adherence and a framework for future research.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2004

Clinical practice guideline: Otitis media with effusion.

The clinical practice guideline on otitis media with effusion (OME) provides evidence-based recommendations on diagnosing and managing OME in children. This is an update of the 1994 clinical practice guideline "Otitis Media With Effusion in Young Children," which was developed by the Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research (now the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality). In contrast to the earlier guideline, which was limited to children aged 1 to 3 years with no craniofacial or neurologic abnormalities or sensory deficits, the updated guideline applies to children aged 2 months through 12 years with or without developmental disabilities or underlying conditions that predispose to OME and its sequelae. The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Family Physicians, and American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery selected a subcommittee composed of experts in the fields of primary care, otolaryngology, infectious diseases, epidemiology, hearing, speech and language, and advanced practice nursing to revise the OME guideline. The subcommittee made a strong recommendation that clinicians use pneumatic otoscopy as the primary diagnostic method and distinguish OME from acute otitis media (AOM). The subcommittee made recommendations that clinicians should (1) document the laterality, duration of effusion, and presence and severity of associated symptoms at each assessment of the child with OME; (2) distinguish the child with OME who is at risk for speech, language, or learning problems from other children with OME and more promptly evaluate hearing, speech, language, and need for intervention in children at risk; and (3) manage the child with OME who is not at risk with watchful waiting for 3 months from the date of effusion onset (if known), or from the date of diagnosis (if onset is unknown). The subcommittee also made recommendations that (4) hearing testing be conducted when OME persists for 3 months or longer, or at any time that language delay, learning problems, or a significant hearing loss is suspected in a child with OME; (5) children with persistent OME who are not at risk should be reexamined at 3- to 6-month intervals until the effusion is no longer present, significant hearing loss is identified, or structural abnormalities of the eardrum or middle ear are suspected; and (6) when a child becomes a surgical candidate, tympanostomy tube insertion is the preferred initial procedure. Adenoidectomy should not be performed unless a distinct indication exists (nasal obstruction, chronic adenoiditis); repeat surgery consists of adenoidectomy plus myringotomy, with or without tube insertion. Tonsillectomy alone or myringotomy alone should not be used to treat OME. The subcommittee made negative recommendations that (1) population-based screening programs for OME not be performed in healthy, asymptomatic children and (2) antihistamines and decongestants are ineffective for OME and should not be used for treatment; antimicrobials and corticosteroids do not have long-term efficacy and should not be used for routine management. The subcommittee gave as options that (1) tympanometry can be used to confirm the diagnosis of OME and (2) when children with OME are referred by the primary clinician for evaluation by an otolaryngologist, audiologist, or speech-language pathologist, the referring clinician should document the effusion duration and specific reason for referral (evaluation, surgery), and provide additional relevant information such as history of AOM and developmental status of the child. The subcommittee made no recommendations for (1) complementary and alternative medicine as a treatment for OME based on a lack of scientific evidence documenting efficacy and (2) allergy management as a treatment for OME based on insufficient evidence of therapeutic efficacy or a causal relationship between allergy and OME. Last, the panel compiled a list of research needs based on limitations of the evidence reviewed. The purpose of this guideline is to inform clinicians of evidence-based methods to identify methods to identify, monitor, and manage OME in children aged 2 months through 12 years. The guideline may not apply to children older than 12 years because OME is uncommon and the natural history is likely to differ from younger children who experience rapid developmental change. The target population includes children with or without developmental disabilities or underlying conditions that predispose to OME and its sequelae. The guideline is intended for use by providers of health care to children, including primary care and specialist physicians, nurses and nurse practitioners, physician assistants, audiologists, speech-language pathologists, and child development specialists. The guideline is applicable to any setting in which children with OME would be identified, monitored, or managed. This guideline is not intended as a sole source of guidance in evaluating children with OME. Rather, it is designed to assist primary care and other 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 children with this condition, and may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem.

Acoustic Impedance Tests↗

PubMed1990

Integrating practice guidelines with financial incentives.

Practice guidelines, in whatever form, hold significant implications for the delivery and the financing of health care. Hence, great care must be taken in developing them. They must be scientifically sound and thus defensible. They must incorporate clinical perspectives and consider patients' preferences. They must cover appropriate as well as inappropriate services. They must foster creation and adoption of a rational payment system. What guidelines, in their best form, can do is enable physicians, faced with an overwhelming array of often conflicting information, to reduce some of the uncertainty they must cope with and to practice the most clinically effective medicine. For physicians to do so requires valid information from a credible source, most often in conjunction with appropriate financial incentives.

Clinical Protocols↗

PubMed1999

[Why not standard practice guidelines in Japan?].

The issue of medical practice guidelines has attracted the attention of doctors and health care professionals in Western countries since the middle 1980s. Such guidelines aim to assist in clinical decision-making in order to reduce variations in care and unnecessary costs for delivered health care service, and to improve the outcomes of medical care. Strangely, however, there is no interest or attention given to this topic in the medical and health care fields in Japan. As the president of the 71st Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, the author hopes to generate interest in this topic by opening a symposium at the annual meeting of the JGCA this year. As an introduction to this session, the present paper provides a short review of medical practice guidelines, their development cycle, and their advantages and disadvantages.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2005

Changing nursing practice: evaluating the usefulness of a best-practice guideline implementation toolkit.

PURPOSE: This pilot study describes the evaluation of an 88-page Toolkit that was developed to guide nursing leaders, including advanced practice nurses, managers and steering committees, who were responsible for coordinating implementation of selected best-practice guidelines (BPG) in their respective agencies. METHODS: The self-administered questionnaire was mailed to all clinical resource nurses and steering committee members involved in implementing best-practice guidelines. The questionnaire evaluated the usefulness of the content of five chapters (and the case scenarios and worksheets included with each chapter). RESULTS: Sixty-eight percent of respondents returned the questionnaire. More than 85% of them found the Toolkit helpful during the implementation process; 83% reported using it, 80% said they would use it again. The Toolkit was used primarily to identify, analyze and engage stakehoLders, and to assess environmental readiness. Fifty-seven percent of respondents said they used the Toolkit to plan the implementation strategy. CONCLUSIONS: The Toolkit assessed in this evaluation shows promise as a useful guide for those charged with BPG implementation. Like other guidelines that are based on evidence, the Toolkit will require occasional updates to ensure that the strategies proposed reflect current evidence. Nursing leaders have a responsibility to keep up to date and to provide efficient and effective healthcare services. Best-practice guidelines or clinical practice guidelines are useful tools that synthesize the latest evidence and provide recommendations for care providers aiming to improve the quality of patient care (Grol 2001). Many leaders are challenged to know how and when to implement the increasing numbers of practice guidelines. The purpose of this article is to describe a pilot study to evaluate a Toolkit that was developed to guide nursing leaders in implementing selected best-practice guidelines (BPGs) in their respective agencies.

Benchmarking↗

PubMed2003

[Clinical practice guideline on radiation therapy for lung cancer].

Clinical practice guidelines for radiation therapy in the treatment of lung cancer were prepared by an expert multidisciplinary Panel. This project was supported by a Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, with the primary objective to develop efficient practice guidelines for the treatment of lung cancer by systematic review of currently available evidence. We reviewed pertinent evidence from the published literature with a computerized search on MEDLINE, and filled in abstract forms for the most relevant. All abstract forms were reviewed by other experts in the panel. The extracted problems were as follows: the basics for radiotherapy including machines, planning equipments and quality assurance, definitive radiotherapy for medically inoperable or unresectable non-small cell lung cancer, chemoradiotherapy for non-small or small cell lung cancer, prophylactic cranial irradiation, and palliative irradiation for bone and brain metastases. Values for levels of evidence and grades of recommendation for each problem were discussed and approved by the panel. Essentially, the guidelines propose the minimum requirements for clinical practice. These guidelines, therefore, are expected to be useful for individualized treatments for lung cancer patients.

Bone Neoplasms↗

PubMed1998

Health policy issues and applications for evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines.

Evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines have become increasingly salient to the international health care community in the 1990s. Key issues in health policy in this period can be categorised as costs and access to care, quality of and satisfaction with care, accountability for value in health care, and public health and education. This paper presents a brief overview of evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines and describes how they are likely to influence health policy. Evidence-based medicine focuses on the use of the best available clinical (efficacy) evidence to inform decisions about patient care; guidelines are statements systematically developed from efficacy and effectiveness research and clinical consensus for practitioners and patients to use in making decisions about appropriate care under different clinical circumstances. Both fields have developed methods for evaluating and synthesising available evidence about the outcomes of alternative health care interventions. They have clear implications for health policy analysts: greater reliance should be placed on scientific evidence, policy decisions should be derived systematically, and health care decisionmaking must allow for the active participation of health care providers, policy makers, and patients or their advocates. The methods and information generated from evidence-based guidelines efforts are critical inputs into health policy analysis and decision-making.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2006

Impact of gestational diabetes mellitus nutrition practice guidelines implemented by registered dietitians on pregnancy outcomes.

Nutrition practice guidelines were developed for gestational diabetes mellitus by registered dietitians from the Diabetes Care and Education and the Women's Health and Reproductive Nutrition dietetic practice groups. To validate the guidelines, a clinical trial was designed with clinic sites randomly assigned to either nutrition practice guidelines care (12 sites) or usual nutrition care (13 sites), with diabetes, obstetric, and other clinic types represented in both groups. Volunteer dietitians served as study coordinators and recruited women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus. The nutrition practice guidelines define medical nutrition therapy (MNT) for gestational diabetes and emphasize three areas-definition of MNT clinical goals with indexes to modify or advance MNT and criteria to start insulin; use of self-monitoring tools; and provision of three nutrition visits. Usual care sites provided prenatal nutrition care according to usual practice. The effect of nutrition care (sites following the nutrition care guidelines) and type of clinic site on changes in glycated hemoglobin and infant birth weight, adjusted for other covariates, were evaluated using linear regression. Differences in insulin use and other infant outcomes between treatment groups were evaluated using logistic regression. Generalized estimating equations were used to accommodate nonindependence within randomized clusters of patients within clinic sites. Data from 215 women indicated less insulin use at diabetes clinic sites in the nutrition practice guidelines groups and improved glycated hemoglobin control during the treatment period in diabetes clinics compared with obstetric or other clinics. A higher proportion of women in the usual care group had glycated hemoglobin levels that exceeded 6% at follow-up compared with women in the nutrition practice guidelines group (13.6% vs 8.1%), although not statistically significant (P=0.26). A significant clinic type and treatment group effect was found for birth weight. Nutrition practice guidelines for gestational diabetes mellitus reflected nutrition care already being provided by registered dietitians in diabetes clinics prior to this study because outcomes at these clinics were not impacted. Use of the guidelines by dietitians at obstetric and other clinics tended to improve outcomes at these sites.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

[The practice guideline 'Dementia' (second revision) from the Dutch College of General Practitioners; a response from the perspective of general practice].

With growing numbers of older adults in the population, the number suffering from dementia will increase. The general practitioner has to try to determine the difference between Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia on the one hand, and fronto-temporal dementia and dementia with Lewy bodies on the other hand, while also considering the therapeutic options now and in the future. Support for patients and their family is the responsibility of the general practitioner, who must also consider the patient's driving proficiency and the wishes for euthanasia of the demented older adult. The revised version of the practice guideline 'Dementia' of the Dutch College of General Practitioners is well suited to the work of the general practitioner. It is advisable to read the practice guideline several times and in such cases not only to use the summary card but the entire practice guideline.

Dementia↗

PubMed1998

Role of evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines in treatment decisions.

The Center for Practice and Technology Assessment (CPTA), which falls within the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, was formed in 1997. By combining the Office of the Forum for Quality and Effectiveness in Health Care, which was responsible for the clinical practice guideline program, and the Center for Technology Assessment, CPTA was born. This paper discusses the roles of CPTA in the development of evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines in treatment decisions.

Drug Therapy↗

PubMed1990

Practice guidelines: a new reality in medicine. I. Recent developments.

There is growing interest in the use of practice guidelines for physicians as a means of reducing inappropriate care, controlling geographic variations in practice patterns, and making more effective use of health care resources. Recent developments at the national health policy level suggest that practice guidelines will play an increasingly prominent role in the practice of medicine. The federal government has created a new US Public Health Service agency with responsibility for practice guidelines. Guidelines have been developed by more than 35 physician organizations and specialty societies. The American Medical Association and the Council of Medical Specialty Societies have endorsed practice guidelines and are organizing specialty societies to set policy on the subject. Academic medical centers have formed a research consortium on practice guidelines. Independent research centers (eg, the RAND Corporation and the Institute of Medicine) are developing methods for assessing appropriateness and setting guidelines. Other groups, such as hospitals, insurers, managed care plans, and private enterprises, are also directly involved. The implications of these developments are far reaching.

Academies and Institutes↗