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 883 records · Page 49Linked to original sources

PubMed2000

[Guidelines: some considerations on one of the cultural instruments on which the switch in the National Health System can be based].

In the last few years there has been an explosion of interest in guidelines, reflected in a vivid debate in the international literature. Guidelines for medical practice are not innovative tools, since their history began at least 20 years ago. They are produced with increasing frequency in North America, and similar developments are taking place in Europe. The concept of improving the quality of the services in the National Health System through the production and implementation of valid clinical guidelines has been recognized in Italy by the Ministry of Health, who introduced such a concept in the last reform of the law on the Sanitary Health System. Many international authors deem that clinical guidelines are a way to support effective clinical practice. If this still holds, and we believe it does, then we must ensure that these guidelines are effective. Also for the enthusiast, the entire process from the development to the dissemination, implementation, and evaluation is not an easy task. Guidelines should be written correctly by a multidisciplinary panel of experts, should be peer reviewed and updated. Guidelines should become the common field in which the four major parties of the sanitary "market" (a market far from ideal today) meet: the patient, the doctor, the manager, and the industry involved in medical technology. Guidelines should be disseminated and implemented: simply having evidence available does not necessarily mean that it will be used. Thus, the key question is not so much related to the acceptance of best practice, but the extent to which a guideline is cost-effective. In this review we have tried to discuss such points, taking into consideration all the steps, the discussions, the controversial points, and the unsolved questions which are smoldering under both the potential benefit of practice guidelines (also in the light of appropriateness of medical practice), and all the possible effects on clinical autonomy, health care costs, clinical practice satisfaction, legal implications, and conflicts of interest. It is crucial for medical associations, and indeed for all physicians, to take up this problem and constructively try to play an active part in the process, avoiding the possibility that controversial guidelines be imposed by the regulatory authorities.

Conflict of Interest↗

PubMed2001

Evaluation of guideline quality using GEM-Q.

A variety of rating instruments that evaluate the quality of practice guidelines have been published. Application of these instruments can be difficult and time-consuming. In a literature review, we identified two evaluation instruments that are comprehensive, have clearly defined constructs, and have undergone validation/testing-the Guidelines Quality Assessment Questionnaire (GQAQ) and the Appraisal Instrument for Clinical Guidelines (AICG). Overall, the AICG is more comprehensive. The AICG addresses the implementability of a guideline, which is not evaluated by the GQAQ. However, the GQAQ is more amenable to computerization. GEM-Q is a Guideline Elements Model (GEM)-derived application intended to facilitate automated evaluation of guideline quality using one of the published instruments. To develop GEM-Q, various items in the GQAQ were mapped to corresponding elements in the GEM hierarchy and a customized XSL stylesheet was designed based on this mapping. GEM-Q selectively extracts text components of the guideline relevant to quality evaluation and displays the results in HTML format. GEM-Q was applied to a set of six guidelines to test its reliability. It ranked two guidelines as of "good" quality, two as "intermediate", and two as "poor". In all six instances, GEM-Q ranked guidelines in the same order of quality as the experts who validated the GQAQ. This work demonstrates the feasibility of developing an application to facilitate automated guideline quality evaluation.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗

PubMed2001

Sterilization of mentally retarded individuals: informed consent in Guidelines in the Netherlands.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the Guidelines of the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate' with respect to sterilization of mentally retarded individuals. In 1998, the Minister of Health had the 1989 Guidelines replaced by new ones. Two new laws were integrated into these new Guidelines: the Medical Treatment Agreement Act (hereinafter referred to as WGBO, being the Dutch abbreviation) and the Mentorship Act. The minister was also inspired to draw up new Guidelines by the revelation in the media of involuntary sterilizations still taking place in several European countries. She is adamant that the Guidelines should be a 'guarantee against involuntary sterilizations'. This issue requires special guidelines because of judicial questions connected with the sterilization of individuals who are more or less incapable of giving informed consent. Involuntary sterilization is a violation of basic human rights, such as the right of physical integrity and protection of privacy. The Guidelines describe how the decision-making process between doctor, patient, representatives, proxies or guardians should proceed and what to do when parties do not reach consensus. A distinction has been made between competent and incompetent patients. The Guidelines and the WGBO give answers to questions like the following: will the informed consent of representatives and proxies be sufficient to perform sterilization? Do doctors have to follow representatives and proxies? Can sterilization take place in spite of a patient's resistance? The Guidelines focus on the process of decision-making, in order to guarantee an appropriate procedure, with the best possible outcome for the mentally retarded individual. The Guidelines do not answer the question of what legitimate reasons doctors may have for performing sterilization on such a person. Given the substantial questions involved the Minister of Health has asked the Health Council to add possible grounds to the Guidelines that should be taken into account when deciding on sterilization.

Human Rights↗

PubMed2003

Institutioning a clinical practice guideline to decrease the rate of normal appendectomies.

With the advent of laparoscopic appendectomy, the rate of normal appendectomies increased at our institution. To decrease our rate of normal appendectomies, we instituted a clinical practice guideline in January 1999 for the preoperative evaluation and treatment of patients with possible acute appendicitis. The medical records of 464 consecutive patients who underwent either open or laparoscopic appendectomy with a preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2000, were reviewed. The decision of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy was made at the time of surgery by the attending surgeon. Two hundred twelve patients (116 females, 96 males) underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis (142 open, 70 laparoscopic) from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1998, prior to the institution of the guideline. Two hundred fifty-two patients (117 females, 135 males) underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis (193 open, 59 laparoscopic) from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2000 (after the guideline was instituted). Prior to the guideline, the normal appendectomy rate was 21.7 per cent (18.3% open, 28.6% laparoscopic). After the guideline was instituted, the normal appendectomy rate was 16.7 per cent (14.5% open, 23.7% laparoscopic). In females, the normal appendectomy rate prior to the guideline was 31.0 per cent (26.6% open, 36.5% laparoscopic) while the normal appendectomy rate after the guideline was 23.1 per cent (19.0% open, 31.6% laparoscopic), P = 0.172. In males, the normal appendectomy rate prior to the guideline was 10.4 per cent (11.5% open, 5.6% laparoscopic) while the normal appendectomy rate after the guideline was 11.1 per cent (11.4% open, 9.5% laparoscopic), P = 0.861. By instituting a guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of possible acute appendicitis, we were able to decrease our rate of normal appendectomies. Although statistical significance was not reached, there is a trend toward decreasing the rate of normal appendectomies in females after the guideline was instituted.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2003

[Algorithm for application of the "ethical guidelines for epidemiological research" and taxonomy of public health research].

BACKGROUND: "Ethical Guidelines for Epidemiological Research" took effect in July 2002, with a moral duty of all researchers to comply when conducting epidemiological studies although it is not legally binding. Public health research entails various forms of studies including not only epidemiological studies but also attention to psychological, societal and economic aspects, which are outside of the jurisdiction of the guidelines. Hence, confusion may arise among members of Japanese Society of Public Health as to whether the study they conduct falls within the definition of epidemiological research. The author discusses legal interpretations of the guidelines arising in the course of translation work as part of government-funded project, "Dissemination of the 'Ethical Guidelines for Epidemiological Research' via Internet (principal investigator: Toru Doi)" and argues that a case-method approach would be best suited to enhance understanding by researchers with diverse, non-legal backgrounds. METHODS: The author proposes an algorithm for classification of studies as to whether the guideline applies, and applies it to all original articles published in the Japanese Journal of Public Health (JJPH) in one year (March 2002 thru February 2003). The rationale for classification is discussed from the strict legal viewpoint in each case. RESULTS: Sixteen out of 46 original articles published in JJPH for one year were classified as epidemiological studies to which the guidelines apply. Those classified otherwise were psychological studies (10), epidemiological studies not targeting specific diseases and are exempt form the guidelines (3), purely methodological studies (4), economics studies (3), fact-finding or opinion surveys with no hypothesis testing (2), as well as studies authorized by law (4) or using unlinkable anonymous data only (4), all of which are exempt from the guidelines. Reference to ethical considerations in the methodology section as required by the instructions for authors was generally well performed in epidemiological studies although some shortcomings were noted. DISCUSSIONS: The guidelines affect approximately a third of original articles published in the JJPH. The ratio of applicable to non-applicable articles was roughly 1 to 2. This gives both authors and reviewers confusion as to whether articles are subject to the guidelines and would require ethical approval. This case-method approach using actual articles readily available to members should help unnecessary confusion and enhance appropriate application of the guidelines. (366 words).

Algorithms↗

PubMed2004

Towards evidence-based clinical practice guidelines in Saudi Arabia.

The objective of this review is to provide a brief background on clinical practice guidelines CPGs and tools to assess and locally adapt CPGs. Over the last 2 decades, CPGs have become an increasingly popular tool for synthesis of clinical information, so as to change clinical practice and improve quality of health care. Such a quantitative growth in the number of guidelines available in different specialties is a source of concern since there is evidence that recommendations produced by different groups can be conflicting, invalid, unreliable, and even harmful. Various critical appraisal instruments were designed and tested to assess whether developers have minimized the biases inherent in creating guidelines and addressed the requirements for effective implementation. We recommend using the AGREE instrument which was developed by the Appraisal of Guideline Research and Evaluation AGREE collaboration. It is the most well-developed guideline appraisal instrument available, and it has been shown to have good reliability and validity. There is a growing recognition that it is not possible for national guidelines to be produced on every clinical problem of concern. The cost is huge and few practices have the resources or skills to develop their own valid evidence-based guidelines. Several developed countries encourage local adaptation of international good quality guidelines to avoid duplication of work and cost involved in guidelines development. Therefore wherever possible, Saudi guidelines should be based on existing good quality guidelines. The methodology for local adaptation of CPGs to meet the local needs and resources are explained in this review.

Cooperative Behavior↗

PubMed1995

Screening guidelines for Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Evaluating physician awareness, agreement, and use.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether physicians were aware of, agreed with, and followed the "1989 Canadian Guidelines for Screening for Chlamydia Trachomatis Infection "as they applied to screening asymptomatic women. DESIGN: A survey consisting of direct questions and case scenarios was scored according to the responses given in the guidelines. SETTING: Six hospital family practice teaching units in downtown Toronto. PARTICIPANTS: Of 153 staff physicians and residents surveyed (all staff and residents registered with the Department of Family and Community Medicine of the University of Toronto for the 1990-1991 academic year), a volunteer sample of 118 responded to a questionnaire through the mail. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reported awareness, agreement, and use of C trachomatis guidelines for screening asymptomatic women were analyzed using frequency distributions and cross-tabulations. RESULTS: Most (69%) respondents were unaware of the guidelines. Of those who were aware, 46% agreed with the guidelines and 39% claimed to follow the guidelines. Staff physicians appeared to be more aware of guidelines than family medicine residents (P = 0.0175, psi 2 = 11.98); P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. There was no statistically significant association between total scores and physicians' reported awareness of guidelines (P = 0.2287, psi 2 = 4.321). CONCLUSIONS: Most physicians in the sample were unaware of the guidelines. Of physicians who reported awareness of the guidelines, less than half agreed with or routinely followed them. Better methods of influencing physician behaviour must be developed before more guidelines are designed and distributed.

Adult↗

PubMed1994

The use of practice guidelines in Wisconsin for liability protection.

It seems many physicians and other health care professionals are reluctant to advocate that the use of clinical guidelines be expanded because of negative experiences with managed care entities that have based their practice guidelines on economic considerations. Those experiences have led to the erroneous belief by some that all guidelines are minimal or substandard. The trend is clear, however, that clinical practice guidelines will be increasingly important not only in courts but also in the management of health care. They are here to stay and they provide the medical profession with an opportunity now more than ever to decide its own destiny in medical malpractice litigation without the need for new legislation in Wisconsin. Accordingly, physicians should become pro-active at medical staff departmental meetings, in local and national professional associations, and, if necessary, in the political arena to encourage the adoption of valid guidelines--those that meet acceptable medical standards. In this way the risk that practice guideline use will become both the maximum and minimum standard of care will remain only a theory. While the decision to use clinical practice guidelines is solely up to a physician, he or she should be aware of a guideline's recommendations for any given patient situation. Ideal practice can still be followed by bad outcomes that prompt patients to claim negligence. By choosing a valid guideline and making a reasonable attempt to follow that guideline, a physician has maximized his or her opportunity for both preventing and prevailing in litigation. If, however, a guideline exists and it is unintentionally ignored, liability is more likely.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Health Care Reform↗

PubMed1996

Electronically distributed, computer-generated, individualized feedback enhances the use of a computerized practice guideline.

Clinical guidelines have been developed to assist with the management of patient care; however, these guidelines are frequently neglected in clinical practice. Computer-generated reminders enhance guideline use, but these systems often fail to achieve high rates of guideline utilization. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that computer-generated, individualized feedback regarding adherence to care guidelines will significantly improve clinician compliance with guideline recommendations presented through a computer-assisted management protocol. Half of the 45 primary care clinicians employed at a primary care clinic affiliated with an academic medical center, were randomized to receive a biweekly electronic mail message consisting of a computer-generated report summarizing his/her response to care guideline recommendations for the diabetic patients seen during the previous 2 weeks. Clinician compliance with guideline recommendations was the primary outcome measure. This study demonstrated that the intervention significantly increased clinician compliance with the guideline recommendations without incurring high maintenance expenses. Median compliance among the intervention group was 35% versus 6.1% among the control group (p < 0.01). Electronically distributed, computer-generated, individualized feedback regarding clinician use of care guideline recommendations is an effective way to enhance compliance with a care guideline.

Attitude to Computers↗

PubMed1997

Guidelines for dyspepsia management in general practice using focus groups.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of published guidelines on managing dyspepsia in general practice. Existing guidelines emphasize the role of investigations and drugs rather than management approaches. Focus groups are a means of uncovering the way in which the participants think and work in the pragmatic-setting, and have not previously been formally used in creating guidelines. AIM: To develop guidelines for the management of dyspepsia and to assess the use of focus groups of general practitioners (GPs) in order to do so. METHOD: Initial evidence-based guidelines were proposed by a group of four GPs with an audit facilitator, and used for discussion in three focus groups using a standard format. An anthropological analysis of the proceedings led to modifications of the original guidelines, based on knowledge, perceptions and attitudes. The study was set in three distinct locations involving 30 GPs. The outcome measures consisted of feedback, categorized by types of responses, from the analysis of the focus groups and the creation of guidelines. RESULTS: The resulting guidelines were patient centred and based on the principles of good consultation. They encompassed patients' fears and doctors' clinical uncertainties, and allowed flexibility in the individual patient's management. The focus group methodology exposed a substantial number of GPs to guideline development, and had the added benefits of dissemination, peer review and educational challenge. CONCLUSION: It was possible to develop guidelines for dyspepsia using focus groups. The methodology had the added benefits of ownership, peer review, exposure of educational gaps and locality factors, and dissemination of good practice. It included steps from evidence review to implementation strategies. The development of this technique could lead to a strategy towards the creation and application of evidence-based and professionally acceptable clinical guidelines and practice on a locality basis nationally.

Dyspepsia↗

PubMed1998

Specific issues related to developing, disseminating, and implementing pediatric practice guidelines for physicians, patients, families, and other stakeholders.

OBJECTIVE: To describe ways in which medical information should be developed and disseminated, focusing on pediatric practice guidelines as an example of one type of information. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The methodology of guideline development is well known and has been previously reviewed. Guideline development poses problems for many medical specialties, but particularly for pediatrics, because (1) few diseases are prevalent, (2) only limited randomized controlled trials have been conducted with respect to specific diagnostic and therapeutic options, and (3) clinicians often are dealing with patient surrogates--parents--rather than with the actual patient. Patient and family involvement in guideline development and dissemination has been limited and may affect the likelihood that guidelines will be adopted and subsequently improve child health outcomes. The science of dissemination, including guidelines and other information, is poorly developed. Little is known about the most effective ways to ensure that guidelines reach clinicians and are adopted. Finally, the effect of guidelines on child health outcomes is itself uncertain. RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) Research efforts should focus on guideline dissemination and adoption. (2) The effect of guideline implementation on health outcomes needs to be better understood. (3) Parents should be more involved in guideline dissemination and adoption.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1999

Clinical impact of local implementation of agreed guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the impact of local implementation of clinical practice guidelines on the pattern of care and outcome in patients admitted to the Coronary Care Unit (CCU) with acute myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: Development of clinical practice guidelines is among the most popular of the methods intended to promote translation of results from clinical trials into routine care. However, very little is known about the actual impact on routine care of the clinical guidelines for managing patients with acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: We reviewed a prospectively collected cohort of consecutive patients discharged with a diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction from S. Maria degli Angeli, a large community-based hospital in northeast Italy. Eighty-six patients treated in 1996 (before guideline implementation) were compared with 70 patients treated in 1997 (after guideline implementation) with respect to patterns of use of guideline-directed pharmacotherapies for acute myocardial infarction, diagnostic testing, length of CCU stay and clinical outcome. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in male gender, age, infarct location and severity. Patients managed before guideline implementation were less likely to receive thrombolysis (36 vs 50%; p = 0.05), i.v. beta-blockers at admission (13 vs 31%; p = 0.002), oral beta-blockers at CCU discharge (45 vs 74%; p = 0.0003). When these were given, patients managed before guideline implementation received lower dosages of i.v. heparin, as manifested by a lower proportion of patients reaching adequate aPTT levels at 24 hours (14 vs 62%, p < 0.0001), and of oral beta-blockers (-50%, p < 0.0001), and higher dosage of aspirin (+100%, p < 0.0001). The time to mobilization (+1 day) and the length of CCU stay (+0.5 day) were longer in patients managed before guideline implementation (p < 0.0001). Incidence of major complications was similar between the two groups (19 vs 13%, respectively; p = ns). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with myocardial infarction managed after local implementation of clinical practice guidelines were more likely to receive evidence-based effective pharmacotherapies, and to have earlier mobilization and earlier discharge from CCU. This study strongly supports the role of local implementation of clinical practice guidelines to optimize management of patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2004

Radiotherapy fractionation for the palliation of uncomplicated painful bone metastases - an evidence-based practice guideline.

BACKGROUND: This practice guideline was developed to provide recommendations to clinicians in Ontario on the preferred standard radiotherapy fractionation schedule for the treatment of painful bone metastases. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed and published elsewhere. The Supportive Care Guidelines Group, a multidisciplinary guideline development panel, formulated clinical recommendations based on their interpretation of the evidence. In addition to evidence from clinical trials, the panel also considered patient convenience and ease of administration of palliative radiotherapy. External review of the draft report by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a mailed survey, and final approval was obtained from the Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee. RESULTS: Meta-analysis did not detect a significant difference in complete or overall pain relief between single treatment and multifraction palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases. Fifty-nine Ontario practitioners responded to the mailed survey (return rate 62%). Forty-two percent also returned written comments. Eighty-three percent of respondents agreed with the interpretation of the evidence and 75% agreed that the report should be approved as a practice guideline. Minor revisions were made based on feedback from the external reviewers and the Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee. The Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee approved the final practice guideline report. CONCLUSION: For adult patients with single or multiple radiographically confirmed bone metastases of any histology corresponding to painful areas in previously non-irradiated areas without pathologic fractures or spinal cord/cauda equine compression, we conclude that: Where the treatment objective is pain relief, a single 8 Gy treatment, prescribed to the appropriate target volume, is recommended as the standard dose-fractionation schedule for the treatment of symptomatic and uncomplicated bone metastases. Several factors frequently considered in clinical practice when applying this evidence such as the effect of primary histology, anatomical site of treatment, risk of pathological fracture, soft tissue disease and cord compression, use of antiemetics, and the role of retreatment are discussed as qualifying statements.Our systematic review and meta-analysis provided high quality evidence for the key recommendation in this clinical practice guideline. Qualifying statements addressing factors that should be considered when applying this recommendation in clinical practice facilitate its clinical application. The rigorous development and approval process result in a final document that is strongly endorsed by practitioners as a practice guideline.

Adult↗

PubMed2025

A Digital Tool for Clinical Evidence-Driven Guideline Development by Studying Properties of Trial Eligible and Ineligible Populations: Development and Usability Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guideline development preferentially relies on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are gold-standard methods to evaluate the efficacy of treatments with the highest internal validity but limited external validity, in the sense that their findings may not always be applicable to or generalizable to clinical populations or population characteristics. The external validity of RCTs for the clinical population is constrained by the lack of tailored epidemiological data analysis designed for this purpose due to data governance, consistency of disease or condition definitions, and reduplicated effort in analysis code. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a digital tool that characterizes the overall population and differences between clinical trial eligible and ineligible populations from the clinical populations of a disease or condition regarding demography (eg, age, gender, ethnicity), comorbidity, coprescription, hospitalization, and mortality. Currently, the process is complex, onerous, and time-consuming, whereas a real-time tool may be used to rapidly inform a guideline developer's judgment about the applicability of evidence. METHODS: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-particularly the gout guideline development group-and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network guideline developers were consulted to gather their requirements and evidential data needs when developing guidelines. An R Shiny (R Foundation for Statistical Computing) tool was designed and developed using electronic primary health care data linked with hospitalization and mortality data built upon an optimized data architecture. Disclosure control mechanisms were built into the tool to ensure data confidentiality. The tool was deployed within a Trusted Research Environment, allowing only trusted preapproved researchers to conduct analysis. RESULTS: The tool supports 128 chronic health conditions as index conditions and 161 conditions as comorbidities (33 in addition to the 128 index conditions). It enables 2 types of analyses via the graphic interface: overall population and stratified by user-defined eligibility criteria. The analyses produce an overview of statistical tables (eg, age, gender) of the index condition population and, within the overview groupings, produce details on, for example, electronic frailty index, comorbidities, and coprescriptions. The disclosure control mechanism is integral to the tool, limiting tabular counts to meet local governance needs. An exemplary result for gout as an index condition is presented to demonstrate the tool's functionality. Guideline developers from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network provided positive feedback on the tool. CONCLUSIONS: The tool is a proof-of-concept, and the user feedback has demonstrated that this is a step toward computer-interpretable guideline development. Using the digital tool can potentially improve evidence-driven guideline development through the availability of real-world data in real time.

Humans↗

PubMed2002

The relation between methods and recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for hypertension and hyperlipidemia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between methods used to develop clinical practice guidelines and the recommendations that are made. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for hypertension or hyperlipidemia. OUTCOMES MEASURED: Two people independently appraised guideline methods by using 8 criteria and the aggressiveness of recommendations for treatment thresholds, initial drug selection, and screening. RESULTS: We identified 33 guidelines. Only 6 fulfilled 5 or more of the 8 criteria. For 5 of the criteria, fewer than 50% of the guidelines fulfilled those criteria. There was wide variation in recommendations for treatment thresholds, drug selection, and cholesterol screening. Guidelines that did not fulfill the criteria tended to suggest more aggressive recommendations than did guidelines that met the criteria. For 6 of the 8 criteria, guidelines published by specialty societies were less likely to fulfill them compared with guidelines not published by specialty societies. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline developers who did not use rigorous methods tended to promote intervening more aggressively for hypertension and hyperlipidemia.

Adult↗

PubMed1993

School lunch: a comparison of the fat and cholesterol content with dietary guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the fat and cholesterol content of the foods offered and selected in an elementary school lunch program with current dietary guidelines. DESIGN: For 105 school days we recorded the food items selected by elementary school students in an entire school district (262,851 meals) who were given a choice between two entrees. The nutrient content of foods was assessed with a computerized nutrient data base supplemented by the food manufacturers' data. SETTING: Sixteen elementary schools in the Bellevue (Washington) School District. PARTICIPANTS: The number of students eating school lunch averaged 2500 per day, of whom 25% were from households with incomes less than 185% of poverty. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We determined the nutritional content of the average meal selected; the proportion of days when one of the two offered entrees met fat and cholesterol guidelines; and the proportion of children selecting the entrees that met the guidelines. RESULTS: The average lunch selected had 35.9% of calories from total fat and 12.6% from saturated fat, exceeding the guidelines of 30% and 10%, respectively. Lunch contained an average of 57 mg cholesterol (106 mg/1000 kcal) and met guidelines. One of the two daily entree choices met guidelines for both total fat and saturated fat on 20% of days, and met both fat and cholesterol guidelines on 14% of days. When available, entrees meeting the fat guidelines were chosen by 37% of students, and entrees meeting both fat and cholesterol guidelines were chosen by 34% of students. CONCLUSIONS: In this school district the average lunch selected did not meet the current guidelines for dietary fat; when given the choice, more than one third of students selected the entrees that met these guidelines.

Child↗

PubMed2001

Practice guidelines: useful and "participative" method? Survey of Italian physicians by professional setting.

BACKGROUND: Professional setting might be a key determinant of physicians' attitudes toward practice guidelines, influencing the effect of their implementation. Because no previous surveys have specifically considered this aspect, we evaluated the perceived role and usefulness of guidelines, as well as barriers to and facilitators of their implementation, for hospital, primary care, and nonpracticing clinicians. METHODS: A 43-item self-administered questionnaire was sent to all National Health Service physicians in the province of Modena, Italy (593 primary care physicians, 1049 hospital physicians, and 149 nonpracticing clinicians), and 1199 (66.9%) responded. Opinions and attitudes were assessed using 5-point ordinal scales and an attitude measurement scale. Results were evaluated overall and by professional setting, sex, age, year of graduation, and academic background. RESULTS: Practice guidelines were generally perceived to be less useful than other sources of medical information (eg, personal experience, conferences, colleagues, articles, the Internet, and textbooks [pharmaceutical representatives were the exception]). Most physicians thought that guidelines are developed for cost-containment reasons and expressed concerns about their limited applicability to individual patients and local settings. Most respondents did not favor the involvement of health professionals other than physicians in guideline development and use and preferred nonmonetary incentives for their implementation. Answers to individual items and attitude scores varied significantly across professional settings. Primary care physicians showed, in general, the least favorable attitudes toward practice guidelines, toward nonphysicians participating in guideline development and use, and toward incentives for guideline users. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians perceived practice guidelines as externally imposed and cost-containment tools rather than as decision-supporting tools. Regularly monitoring attitudes toward practice guidelines can be helpful to evaluate potential barriers to their adoption.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2001

The impact of practice guidelines in the management of Barrett esophagus: a national prospective cohort study of physicians.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance of patients with Barrett esophagus (BE) is recommended to detect dysplasia and early cancer. In 1998, practice guidelines for the surveillance of patients with BE were developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG). Our objective is to assess physicians' awareness of agreement with and adherence to these guidelines. METHODS: A national prospective cohort study of practicing gastroenterologists who completed a self-administered questionnaire containing case studies prior to the release of the guidelines and another survey 18 months later. Analysis of adherence to the guidelines was done using the McNemar chi(2) test. RESULTS: Of the 154 gastroenterologists (66%) who responded to the follow-up survey, more than half (55%) were aware of the guidelines, and members of the ACG were more likely to know of their existence than nonmembers (61% vs 38%; P =.01). Overall, about 27% of physicians reported practicing in accordance with the guidelines at baseline; adherence increased modestly to 38% in the 18-month follow-up (P =.04) and was inversely related to fee-for-service reimbursement. Awareness was not associated with an increased likelihood of adherence, but agreement with the guidelines was strongly correlated with adherence (P<.001). The most frequent reasons for disagreement were concerns about liability, cancer risk, and inadequate evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of the guidelines published by the ACG was low. Guideline awareness did not predict adherence. Improvement in guideline adherence will require steps beyond mere dissemination and promotion. Addressing disagreements about liability, disease risk, and scientific evidence as well as restructuring payment incentives may help achieve optimal practice.

Adult↗