SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Guidelines”

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 721 records · Page 40Linked to original sources

PubMed2004

Quality of primary care guidelines for acute low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of clinical guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To assess the methodologic quality of existing guidelines for the management of acute low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Guidelines are playing an increasingly important role in evidence-based practice. After publication of the Quebec Task Force in Canada in 1987 and the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines in the United States in 1994, guidelines for acute low back pain were developed in many other countries. However, little is known about the methodologic quality of these guidelines. METHODS: Guidelines were selected by electronically searching MEDLINE and the Internet and through personal communication with experts in the field of low back pain research in primary care. The methodologic quality of the guidelines was assessed by two authors independently using the AGREE instrument. RESULTS: A total of 17 guidelines were included. Overall, the quality of reporting of guidelines was disappointing. Most guidelines clearly described the aim of the guideline and its target population, and most guideline development committees were multiprofessional. However, many other methodologic flaws were identified. More than half of the guidelines did not take patients' preferences into account, did not perform a pilot test among target users, did not clearly describe the methods of study identification and selection, did not include an external review, did not provide a procedure for updating, were not supported with tools for application, did not consider potential organizational barriers and cost implications, did not provide criteria for monitoring and audit, did not include recommendations for implementation strategies, and did not adequately record editorial independence and conflict of interest of the members. The diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations of the guidelines were largely similar. CONCLUSIONS: The quality and transparency of the development process and the consistency in the reporting of primary care guidelines for low back pain need to be improved.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1997

Practice guidelines in Finland: availability and quality.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the quantity, quality, and availability of practice guidelines currently used in Finland. DESIGN: Cross sectional survey. METHODS: Guidelines from 1989 to 1995 were collected through a database search, through hand searches of the two Finnish general medical journals, and through an inquiry into hospitals, health centres, and medical societies. The content and source of evidence for guidelines was assessed. RESULTS: 719 practice guidelines were found. 578 guidelines (80%) were retrieved by the inquiry, the database search identified 27 (4%) and hand searches 106 (15%). There were 150 guidelines (21%) developed nationally, 120 (17%) regionally, and 449 (62%) locally. The structure and quality of evidence supporting the guidelines was variable and only two guidelines were based on meta-analysis. The references were significantly more often (P < 0.001) documented in the national guidelines (n = 129, 86%) than in the regional or local guidelines (n = 65, 11%). CONCLUSIONS: There are many ways of disseminating guidelines and it may be difficult for end users to find the appropriate guidelines. Sources of evidence were seldom documented in the regional and local guidelines and even some national guidelines lacked all references. More attention should be paid to documenting the level of evidence, structuring the guidelines, and creating optimal strategies for development and dissemination of guidelines.

Cross-Sectional Studies↗

PubMed2003

Perspectives on the value of American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical guidelines as reported by oncologists and health maintenance organizations.

PURPOSE: Although the American Society of Clinical Onoclogy's (ASCO) Health Services Research (HSR) committee activities have primarily focused on clinical guideline development, little is known about the value placed on these guidelines by the desired end users. ASCO members and Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) were surveyed on the value and implementation of ASCO guidelines. In this article, we summarize our findings. METHODS: ASCO members (n = 1500) were queried about whether they had read ASCO's first four clinical guidelines and technology assessment; whether they agreed with the recommendations; whether they used guidelines in clinical practice; and how guidelines had affected reimbursement. HMOs (n = 131) were queried on how they identify, implement, and value the first four ASCO clinical guidelines. RESULTS: The membership survey indicated that ASCO guidelines were read more often by physicians in private healthcare settings compared with physicians in academic practices (P <.02). Disagreement rates were low for all guidelines (range, 1% to 7%). One quarter of respondents reported that the guidelines were difficult to find and difficult to apply to the practice setting, and approximately one tenth of respondents indicated that the guidelines were difficult to evaluate, interpret, or read. The HMO survey indicated that one third of HMOs reported use of ASCO guidelines, with higher rates of usage by larger HMOs and by those with higher National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) ratings. Respondent HMOs valued guidelines for various purposes and used multiple methods of guideline identification and implementation. CONCLUSION: ASCO guidelines are generally highly supported by physicians and HMOs. Additional studies are needed to identify implementation barriers and to see whether guidelines have resulted in improvements in healthcare.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed1999

A novel method of guideline development for the diagnosis and management of mild to moderate hypertension.

BACKGROUND: There are large numbers of clinical guidelines available covering many clinical areas. However, the variable quality of their content has meant that doctors may have been offered advice that has been poorly researched or is of a conflicting nature. It has been shown that local involvement in guideline development increases the likelihood of their use. AIM: To develop a guideline to be used by general practitioners in six practices in Birmingham from existing evidence-based guidelines. METHOD: Recommendations from the four most cited international hypertension guidelines, and the more recently published New Zealand guidelines, were divided into subject areas and tabulated to facilitate direct comparison. Where there was complete or majority (> or = 3/5) agreement, the recommendation was taken as acceptable for inclusion in the new guideline. Where there was disagreement (< or = 2/5), recommendations were based on the best available evidence following a further MEDLINE literature search and critical appraisal of the relevant literature. Each recommendation was accompanied by a grade of evidence (A-D), as defined by the Canadian Hypertension Society, and an 'action required' statement of either 'must', 'should', or 'could', based on the Eli-Lilly National Clinical Audit Centre Hypertension Audit criteria. The recommendations were summarized into a guideline algorithm and a supporting document. The final format of both parts of the guideline was decided after consultation with the practice teams. The practices individually decided on methods of data collection. RESULTS: The guideline was presented as a double-sided, A4 laminated sheet and an A4 bound supporting document containing a synthesis of the original guidelines in tabular form, a table of the resulting recommendations, and appendices of current literature reviews on areas of disagreement. The content of the final Birmingham Clinical Effectiveness Group (BCEG) guideline differed minimally from any of the original guidelines. CONCLUSION: The main strength of this method of guideline development may lie, not in the actual content of the resulting guideline, but in the strength of ownership felt by the BCEG and the practices following its development. While the full process is unlikely to be possible for general practitioners working outside an academic environment, the techniques used could provide a framework for practitioners to adapt national and international guidelines for use at a local level.

Decision Trees↗

PubMed1995

Clinical guidelines in primary care: a survey of general practitioners' attitudes and behaviour.

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom little is known about general practitioners' attitudes to and behaviour concerning clinical guidelines. AIM: A study was performed to investigate these two under-researched areas. METHOD: In 1994 a postal questionnaire on clinical guidelines was sent to all 326 general practitioner principals on the list of Lincolnshire Family Health Services Authority. The questionnaire consisted of 20 attitude statements and an open question on clinical guidelines, as well as surveying characteristics and behaviour of respondents. RESULTS: Of the 326 general practitioners sent questionnaires, 213 (65%) replied. Most respondents (78%) reported having been involved in writing inhouse guidelines. An even greater proportion (92%) reported having participated in clinical audit. Respondents were generally in favour of clinical guidelines, with mean response scores indicating a positive attitude to guidelines in 15 of the 20 statements, a negative attitude in four and equivocation in one. The majority of respondents felt that guidelines were effective in improving patient care (69%). Members (or fellows) of the Royal College of General Practitioners had a more positive attitude than non-members towards guidelines. They were also significantly more likely than non-members to have written inhouse guidelines, as were those who had participated in audit compared with those who had not participated in audit. A substantial minority (over a quarter) of general practitioners were concerned that guidelines may be used for setting performance-related pay, or that they may lead to 'cookbook' medicine, reduce clinical freedom or stifle innovation. There was also concern that guidelines should be scientifically valid. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that many general practitioners in the Lincolnshire Family Health Services Authority area have produced written inhouse guidelines. This is largely sustained by positive attitudes about the effectiveness and benefits of clinical guidelines. The positive attitude of RCGP members supports it in its continuing role in developing, implementing and evaluating guidelines in primary care. The question of whether incorporation of guidelines into clinical audit is an effective means to disseminate systematic research-based guidelines warrants further study.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2006

Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 16. Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO), like many other organisations around the world, has recognised the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the last of a series of 16 reviews that have been prepared as background for advice from the WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research to WHO on how to achieve this. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the literature on evaluating guidelines and recommendations, including their quality, whether they are likely to be up-to-date, and their implementation. We also considered the role of guideline developers in undertaking evaluations that are needed to inform recommendations. METHODS: We searched PubMed and three databases of methodological studies for existing systematic reviews and relevant methodological research. We did not conduct systematic reviews ourselves. Our conclusions are based on the available evidence, consideration of what WHO and other organisations are doing and logical arguments. KEY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: Our answers to these questions were informed by a review of instruments for evaluating guidelines, several studies of the need for updating guidelines, discussions of the pros and cons of different research designs for evaluating the implementation of guidelines, and consideration of the use of uncertainties identified in systematic reviews to set research priorities. How should the quality of guidelines or recommendations be appraised? WHO should put into place processes to ensure that both internal and external review of guidelines is undertaken routinely. A checklist, such as the AGREE instrument, should be used. The checklist should be adapted and tested to ensure that it is suitable to the broad range of recommendations that WHO produces, including public health and health policy recommendations, and that it includes questions about equity and other items that are particularly important for WHO guidelines. When should guidelines or recommendations be updated? Processes should be put into place to ensure that guidelines are monitored routinely to determine if they are in need of updating. People who are familiar with the topic, such as Cochrane review groups, should do focused, routine searches for new research that would require revision of the guideline. Periodic review of guidelines by experts not involved in developing the guidelines should also be considered. Consideration should be given to establishing guideline panels that are ongoing, to facilitate routine updating, with members serving fixed periods with a rotating membership. How should the impact of guidelines or recommendations be evaluated? WHO headquarters and regional offices should support member states and those responsible for policy decisions and implementation to evaluate the impact of their decisions and actions by providing advice regarding impact assessment, practical support and coordination of efforts. Before-after evaluations should be used cautiously and when there are important uncertainties regarding the effects of a policy or its implementation, randomised evaluations should be used when possible. What responsibility should WHO take for ensuring that important uncertainties are addressed by future research when the evidence needed to inform recommendations is lacking? Guideline panels should routinely identify important uncertainties and research priorities. This source of potential priorities for research should be used systematically to inform priority-setting processes for global research.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2000

National guidelines for Swedish neonatal nursing care: evaluation of clinical application.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical application of national guidelines for neonatal nursing. DESIGN: Questionnaire survey. SETTING: Thirty-nine neonatal care units in Sweden. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five of 39 nurse managers at all Swedish neonatal care units. INTERVENTION: Thirteen clinical guidelines for neonatal nursing care were presented in 1997. Recommendations on evidence-based nursing care and auditing measures were given. Most neonatal units in Sweden participated in the guideline development. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent of guideline application, ways in which the guidelines were used and perceived usefulness. RESULTS: The guidelines were applied to different extents in 30 of the 35 units. Almost all the guidelines were applied, especially those covering general nursing care. In total, 72 Quality Improvement (QI) projects were reported, of which 51 concerned specific topics covered in the guidelines. Twenty units applied the guidelines as a starting point for QI. Four units evaluated nursing practice against the guidelines. Four factors [Dynamic Standard Setting System (DySSSy) as the QI method, > or = 4 years of practice as nurse manager, experience of nursing research, and good staff resources] were closely related to a more extensive application of the guidelines. Units with both a nurse manager and an assistant nurse manager were more likely to have used the guidelines as the basis for changing clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines were successfully disseminated and diffused, but practitioner involvement in guideline development did not guarantee implementation. Downsizing, leadership and facilitation seemed to be crucial factors when getting evidence into practice. Limited occurrence of evaluations of clinical practice against guideline recommendations suggests a need for valid and user-friendly measures.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2000

US public health service clinical practice guideline: treating tobacco use and dependence.

Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence, a Public Health Service-sponsored Clinical Practice Guideline, is a product of the Tobacco Use and Dependence Guideline Panel ("the panel"), consortium representatives, consultants, and staff. These 30 individuals were charged with the responsibility of identifying effective, experimentally validated tobacco dependence treatments and practices. The updated guideline was sponsored by a consortium of seven Federal Government and nonprofit organizations: the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and University of Wisconsin Medical School's Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention. This guideline is an updated version of the 1996 Smoking Cessation Clinical Practice Guideline No. 18 that was sponsored by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (now the AHRQ), United States Department of Health and Human Services. The original guideline reflected the extant scientific research literature published between 1975 and 1994. The updated guideline was written because new, effective clinical treatments for tobacco dependence have been identified since 1994. The accelerating pace of tobacco research that prompted the update is reflected in the fact that 3,000 articles on tobacco were identified as published between 1975 and 1994, contributing to the original guideline. Another 3,000 were published between 1995 and 1999 and contributed to the updated guideline. These 6,000 articles were screened and reviewed to identify a much smaller group of articles that served as the basis for guideline data analyses and panel opinion. This guideline contains strategies and recommendations designed to assist clinicians, tobacco dependence treatment specialists, and health care administrators, insurers, and purchasers in delivering and supporting effective treatments for tobacco use and dependence. The recommendations were made as a result of a systematic review and analysis of the extant scientific literature, using meta-analysis as the primary analytic technique. The strength of evidence that served as the basis for each recommendation is clearly indicated in the guideline. A draft of the guideline was peer-reviewed prior to publication, and the comments of 70 external reviewers were incorporated into the final document. The key recommendations of the updated guideline, Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence, based on the literature review and expert panel opinion, are as follows: 1. Tobacco dependence is a chronic condition that often requires repeated intervention. However, effective treatments exist that can produce long-term or even permanent abstinence. 2. Because effective tobacco dependence treatments are available, every patient who uses tobacco should be offered at least one of these treatments: Patients willing to try to quit tobacco use should be provided with treatments identified as effective in this guideline. Patients unwilling to try to quit tobacco use should be provided with a brief intervention designed to increase their motivation to quit. 3. It is essential that clinicians and health care delivery systems (including administrators, insurers, and purchasers) institutionalize the consistent identification, documentation, and treatment of every tobacco user seen in a health care setting. 4. Brief tobacco dependence treatment is effective, and every patient who uses tobacco should be offered at least brief treatment. 5. There is a strong dose-response relation between the intensity of tobacco dependence counseling and its effectiveness. Treatments involving person-to-person contact (via individual, group, or proactive telephone counseling) are consistently effective, and their effectiveness increases with treatment intensity (eg, minutes of contact). 6. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Female↗

PubMed2006

Hybrid specification, storage, retrieval and runtime application of clinical guidelines.

Clinical guidelines are a major tool in improving the quality of medical care. However, most guidelines are in free text, are not machine-comprehensible and are not easily accessible to clinicians at the point of care. We have designed and implemented a web-based, modular, distributed architecture, the Digital Electronic Guideline Library (DeGeL), which facilitates gradual conversion of clinical guidelines from text to a formal representation in the chosen target guideline ontology. The architecture supports guideline classification, semantic markup, context-sensitive search, browsing, run-time application and retrospective quality assessment. The DeGeL hybrid meta-ontology includes elements common to all guideline ontologies, such as semantic classification and domain knowledge; it also includes four content-representation formats: free text, semi-structured text, semi-formal representation and a formal representation. These formats support increasingly sophisticated computational tasks. Guidelines can thus be in a hybrid representation in which guidelines, and even parts of the same guideline, might exist at different formalisation levels. We have also developed and rigorously evaluated a methodology and an associated web-based tool, Uruz, for gradually structuring and semi-formalising free-text clinical guidelines. Finally, we have designed, implemented and evaluated a new approach, the hybrid runtime application model, for supporting runtime application of clinical guidelines that are not necessarily in a machine-comprehensible format; in particular, when the guideline is in a semi-formal representation and the patient's data are either in an electronic medical record or in a paper format. The tool implementing this new approach, the Spock module, is customised at this point to the Asbru guideline specification language and exploits the hybrid structure of guidelines in DeGeL. The Spock module also exploits our temporal-abstraction mediator to the patient record, IDAN, and our interactive intelligent-visualisation tool, KNAVE-II.

Decision Support Systems, Clinical↗

PubMed2002

[Effects of a regional intervention to promote asthma guidelines implementation].

AIM: Despite of asthma guidelines existing for years, secondary data analysis shows insufficient medical care of asthmatics in Germany. The aim of the present study was to improve asthma guideline adherence by promoting guidelines implementation. METHOD: We analyzed prospectively pre- and post-interventional medical care of a sample of 127 asthmatics who were recruited by physicians working in ambulatory care and in hospitals of the Region Neckar-Alb, Germany. Data came primarily from patient interviews by phone. Our intervention to promote guidelines implementation consisted of following methods: 1. analyzing regional asthma care followed by a feedback performance report to physicians; 2. delivering asthma patient diaries and peak flow meters to study patients; 3. developing and adapting regionally asthma guidelines for adult asthmatics in the Region of Neckar-Alb; 4. promoting guidelines utilization by publishing the adapted guidelines in a scientific journal, direct mailing of a short version to the practitioners, and boosting the guidelines at regional CE meetings; 5. reanalyzing asthma care of the study cohort and the implementation of the guidelines 13 months after the beginning of the intervention. We studied the effect of the intervention using a qualitative model comprising 18 quality indicators measuring the proportion of patients who were treated in accordance to the guidelines. To compare pre- and post-interventional proportions we used the McNemar test for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The proportion of asthmatics treated in accordance to the guidelines improved significantly from 48 % to 57 %. The increase was mainly due to an improvement of guidelines adherence within the field of promoting asthma self-management and continuous monitoring of patients (42 % pre- and 57 % post-intervention), whereas guidelines adherence in pharmacotherapy improved only from 53 % to 56 %. CONCLUSION: The proportion of asthmatics treated in accordance to guidelines can be improved by using a multifaceted regional approach to promote guidelines implementation.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

End-of-life content in treatment guidelines for life-limiting diseases.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are systematically developed statements that influence medical practice, education, and funding. Guidelines represent the consensus of leaders, often based on systematic reviews of the literature, regarding the "state of the art." OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree to which end-of-life care is integrated into nationally developed guidelines for chronic, noncurable, life-limiting diseases. DESIGN: Four compendia were reviewed: The Healthcare Standards Directory ECRI, 2001; the Clinical Practice Guidelines Directory, 2000 edition; the National Guidelines Clearinghouse, (guideline.gov); and the National Library of Medicine's MEDLINE database on the OVID platform for guidelines on nine chronic diseases (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, end-stage liver disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, congestive heart failure, dementia, cerebrovascular accident, end-stage renal disease, cancer [breast, colon, prostate, lung], and human immunodeficiency virus). They were assessed by two reviewers for end-of-life content in 15 domains (e.g., epidemiology of death, symptom management, spiritual, family roles, and settings of care), the presence of eight specific terms dealing with palliative care, integration of palliative care information into the guideline, and descriptive variables. SETTING/SUBJECTS: Not available. MEASUREMENTS: Each guideline was examined and rated on a 0-2 scale (0, absent content; 1, minimal content; 2, helpful content) using 15 end-of-life content domains. Scores from domains were summed and classified into 3 categories: 4 or less, minimal; 5-12, moderate; and more than 12, significant content. RESULTS: Ten percent of guidelines had significant palliative care content, 64% had minimal content, and 26% had moderate content. The least addressed domains dealt with spirituality, ethics, advocacy and family roles. When guidelines that dealt solely with prevention, acute exacerbations or complications of an illness, or specific treatment modalities were excluded 28% and 16% of these general guidelines (n = 58) had moderate and significant palliative care content, respectively, compared to 24% and 0% of all nongeneral guidelines. Similar results were found when analyzing the data by disease course or treatment focus. Only 14% of guidelines advised physicians to consider palliative care at a specific point in the disease course. Ninety-one percent of the guidelines mentioned death, dying, end of life, mortality, or terminal illness but only 36% mentioned palliation or hospice. CONCLUSION: Current national guidelines on nine chronic, life-limiting illnesses offer little guidance in end-of-life care issues despite a recent increase in attention to this aspect of medical care.

Chronic Disease↗

PubMed2000

Evaluation of the red blood cell and plasma transfusion guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: To determine physicians' preferred content and format for the Guidelines for Red Blood Cell and Plasma Transfusion for Adults and Children before development in order to guide the development process. To obtain physicians' recommendations about the Guidelines' content, format, dissemination and future directions after development to guide future work on the Guidelines. DESIGN: Pre-post Guidelines qualitative design using 20 focus groups (nine pre and 11 post). STUDY PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and seven physicians (5-11 per group) who used at least 1 unit of blood over the past 6 months; with a minimum of 1 year in practice and not retired. A total of 24 physicians attended both pre and post focus groups. In general, specialties of participants included: general practice, surgery pediatrics, obstetrics/gynecology and hematology/oncology. Years of practice ranged from 1 to 35 years (mean = 7 years). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pre Guidelines focus groups made recommendations on the content and format of the Guidelines; post Guidelines focus groups made recommendations on the same areas along with dissemination and future directions. RESULTS: Three main components of the Guidelines were evaluated: content, format and dissemination. The content, which followed as much as possible that recommended by pre Guidelines focus groups, was deemed appropriate by post Guidelines focus groups, with minor gaps noted (e.g. information on alternatives to blood products). The format addressed many of the concerns raised by pre Guidelines focus groups; however, the post Guidelines focus groups were concerned about the lack of visual aids and categorization of information. The dissemination strategy was successful at diffusing the Guidelines, with some concerns expressed about reaching specific physician target groups. CONCLUSION: The pre-post focus group method was useful in conducting an evaluation of the Guidelines and this method which examined content, format and dissemination could contribute to evaluations of other guidelines.

Adult↗

PubMed1994

Reducing lengths of stay in the coronary care unit with a practice guideline for patients with congestive heart failure. Insights from a controlled clinical trial.

Although more than 1,000 medical practice guidelines have been developed, there have been few evaluations of their use in clinical practice or information to judge whether practice guidelines can be used to reduce health care costs. For this reason, the authors conducted a prospective controlled clinical trial with an alternating-month design at a large teaching community hospital to study the use of a practice guideline to promote early transfer of patients admitted to a hospital with congestive heart failure (CHF) from the coronary care unit (CCU) and intermediate care unit to unmonitored beds. The practice guideline was supported by locally derived risk information and recommended consideration of early "step-down" transfer of low-risk patients with CHF 24 hours after hospital admission. Physicians caring for patients identified as "low risk" received concurrent personalized written and verbal reminders concerning the guideline recommendation. Study subjects were patients admitted to a hospital CCU and intermediate care unit between November 1, 1991 and April 30, 1993 with a diagnosis of CHF or pulmonary edema. Ninety patients with CHF were identified as low risk according to the guideline during the study period. Feedback of the practice guideline recommendation was not associated with a significant increase in physician adoption of the guideline or shorter lengths of stay in the CCU or intermediate care unit. Physicians may have compensated for statistically insignificant reductions in monitored lengths of stay by increasing the length of stay in unmonitored beds (1.80 +/- 2.32 to 4.02 +/- 4.09 days, P = .002) and the total length of stay (4.73 +/- 2.43 to 6.71 +/- 5.44 days, P = .03). Quality of patient care, patient outcomes, and patient satisfaction were not affected by the guideline. Our study results suggest that implementation of a locally derived practice guideline for patients with CHF did not result in adoption of the guideline by physicians. The complexity of implementing the guideline, changes in physician practice before the study, and the failure of the guideline to address the continuum of patient care across monitored and unmonitored beds may have accounted for rejection of the guideline. Our experience demonstrates that practice guidelines, whenever possible, should be evaluated in prospective trials before they should be disseminated for widespread use.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Who needs an exercise stress test? Evaluating the new American College of Sports Medicine risk stratification guidelines.

PURPOSE: The American College of Sports Medicine recently published new guidelines to classify individuals at increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) before starting a vigorous (> 60% maximum oxygen consumption) exercise program. We compared the prognostic value of the new guidelines to the earlier guidelines. METHODS: Subjects included men and women over 30 years of age, free from known CHD according to the Lipid Research Clinic Follow-up Cohort. Endpoints included an abnormal exercise test result (+/- 1 mm ST, anginal chest pain, or exercise hypotension) and future death of CHD ascertained during an average 12.2 years of follow-up. Data analysis included 2 x 2 contingency tables to compare the test characteristics of the old and new guidelines. RESULTS: Among 4,074 subjects, 219 (5.4%) had abnormal exercise test results and 65 (1.6%) eventually died of CHD. The new guidelines classified 75.7% of individuals as high risk versus 58.7% using the old guidelines. Comparing the new guidelines with the old, test sensitivity was significantly (P = 0.007) higher for patients with an abnormal exercise test result (87% versus 77%) than for patients who died of CHD (100% versus 99%). Test specificity of the new guidelines was significantly (P < 0.001) lower than the old guidelines for individuals with abnormal exercise test results (25% versus 42%) and those who died of CHD (25% versus 42%). The new guidelines also showed significantly lower overall diagnostic accuracy and positive likelihood ratios compared with the old guidelines for both patients with abnormal exercise test results and those who died of CHD. The positive predictive value for the new and old guidelines for both patients with abnormal exercise test results and those who died of CHD were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Although the new guidelines are more sensitive in the abnormal exercise test result endpoint, they are less specific and overall less accurate than the old guidelines given the low prevalence of CHD in this asymptomatic population. The current guidelines should be modified to better target high-risk adults.

Adult↗

PubMed1999

General practitioners' use of guidelines in the consultation and their attitudes to them.

BACKGROUND: There is concern about the apparent lack of uptake of management and referral guideline information by general practitioners (GPs) in their day-to-day consultations with patients. Little is understood about the barriers to the uptake of guidelines as perceived by GPs. AIMS: To explore how GPs gain access to and use guidelines, including computer-based guidelines, in day-to-day consultations with their patients; and to identify the perceived problems and barriers to the use of guidelines in such situations. METHOD: Postal questionnaires enquiring about the practices and attitudes towards the use of guidelines in general practice were completed by 391 of 600 randomly selected GPs in the South and West NHS region. RESULTS: GPs found guidelines a useful method of accessing expert information. Key factors in their uptake were brevity, an authoritative and unbiased source of evidence, and resonance with the GP's usual practices; they also needed to be flexible enough to incorporate individual viewpoints. Guidelines were perceived as being valuable to enable safe delegation of care to other health professionals and for sharing decision-making with patients. Dissemination of guidelines through the medium of computers was acceptable to the majority of GPs. Virtually all (93%) responders reported adapting guidelines to the needs of individual patients. Older GPs from non-fundholding practices were least likely to show a positive attitude towards guidelines. CONCLUSION: In principle, there is a very positive attitude towards the use of guidelines in general practice. However, those developing guidelines for use by GPs in the consulting room need to be aware of the factors that facilitate their use in practice. Educational strategies aimed at increasing the use of guidelines need to take into account the significant proportion who show negative attitudes towards guidelines, whose characteristics have been identified in this study.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2000

Comparing physician and administrator responses to cesarean section guidelines and actual practice.

BACKGROUND: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 1996 to determine to what extent hospitals have adopted guidelines to improve the appropriate use of cesarean section (C-section); discover attitudes of obstetricians toward C-section guidelines; and explore how physician attitudes toward guidelines interact with organizational features. METHODS: The study consisted of two components: (1) Telephone interviews with hospital administrators from Michigan hospitals providing obstetric care (response rate: 100%); these interviews were intended to determine whether guidelines were in use and the processes for their development and implementation. (2) A self-administered mail survey assessing the attitudes of 266 Michigan obstetricians (response rate: 57%), intended to assess their attitudes toward the content and effects of C-section guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of hospitals were using C-section guidelines, according to reports from hospital administrators. Mean C-section rates were not significantly different between hospitals using guidelines and those not using guidelines (23.2% and 22.4%, p = 0.49). More than 80% of physicians felt that the guidelines were supported by the literature and were applicable in daily practice, and agreed with their ideas about C-section performance, and 67% reported that guidelines would have no or minimal effect on their practice. However, only 55% of physicians and administrators agreed on the presence or absence of guidelines at their hospital (kappa = 0.09). DISCUSSION: Physicians appear to agree with guidelines and believe they are already following them, despite high C-section rates. Physicians' attitudes toward guidelines are not necessarily a reflection of actual practice. If C-section guidelines are to decrease excessive C-section rates, stronger, more integrated implementation strategies are needed.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2006

Current challenges in adherence to clinical guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery.

UNLABELLED: To study the impact of guidelines on surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in clinical practice, barriers involved in adherence to guidelines and how to overcome the same. METHODS: Literature pertaining to prophylactic antibiotic usage was searched. Medscape, Medline, Cochrane, Surgical Infection Prevention (SIP) project databases were reviewed. Recent articles from relevant journals, texts, and standard guidelines were also studied. RESULTS: Local guidelines seem more likely to be accepted and followed than those developed nationally. Major barriers involved in adherence to guidelines include lack of awareness about the guidelines, general perception of guideline as a bureaucratic rather than educational tool. Some practitioners perceive guidelines as "cookbook medicine" that does not permit them to make their own medical decisions. Other barriers are complex, multi-step systems that create confusion, decrease accountability. Methods for guideline adherence include surveillance and data analysis, new systems to facilitate documentation and improving workflow, education regarding current evidence-based guidelines and promoting the development of local guidelines or protocol, development and implementation of reminders to facilitate adherence to the local guidelines. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary steering team of surgeons, infectious disease specialists, pharmacists, anesthesiologists, microbiologists and nurses should develop local guidelines suitable to their institution and methods for adherence to prevent the surgical site infections. The gap between evidence-based guidelines and practice must be addressed in order to achieve optimal practice in this domain.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗

PubMed1997

Family physicians' attitudes about and use of clinical practice guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The use of clinical guidelines is one strategy intended to improve health care quality, rein in costs, and standardize medical practice. Clinical guideline development has been prodigious, while less effort has been expended on the guidelines' dissemination and implementation. This study examines family physician attitudes toward and perceived uses of clinical guidelines in practice. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was sent to 978 family physicians in Upstate New York to assess their confidence in clinical guidelines developed or endorsed by organizations and the perceived usefulness of such guidelines in practice. Descriptive analyses, chi-square tests, and comparison of means (one-way ANOVA) were conducted. RESULTS: After two mailings, the response rate was 43%. Most respondents perceived clinical guidelines as effective educational tools that should improve the quality of patient care, but were concerned about their potential regulatory intrusion into practice. Solo practitioners expressed more negative attitudes regarding clinical guidelines than physicians in non-solo practices. Respondents had greater confidence in clinical guidelines developed or endorsed by their professional society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Preventive Services Task Force, and the National Institutes of Health, but less in those by insurance companies or state health departments. The reported adoption rate of clinical guidelines was low. The most preferred methods for adoption were continuing medical education and practice interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians found clinical guidelines to be valuable educational tools but were divided on their potential regulatory role. If clinical guidelines are to improve quality in practice, they must be more effectively disseminated and implemented. To broaden physicians' adoption of clinical guidelines, further research into dissemination and implementation methods is warranted, along with wider endorsement of guidelines by those whom family physicians trust.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗