SEARCH · PubMed Health
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.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
CONTEXT: Practice guidelines play an important role in medicine. Methodological principles have been formulated to guide their development. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether practice guidelines in peer-reviewed medical literature adhered to established methodological standards for practice guidelines. DESIGN: Structured review of guidelines published from 1985 through June 1997 identified by a MEDLINE search. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean number of standards met based on a 25-item instrument and frequency of adherence. RESULTS: We evaluated 279 guidelines, published from 1985 through June 1997, produced by 69 different developers. Mean overall adherence to standards by each guideline was 43.1% (10.77/25). Mean (SD) adherence to methodological standards on guideline development and format was 51.1% (25.3%); on identification and summary of evidence, 33.6% (29.9%); and on the formulation of recommendations, 46% (45%). Mean adherence to standards by each guideline improved from 36.9% (9.2/25) in 1985 to 50.4% (12.6/25) in 1997 (P<.001). However, there was little improvement over time in adherence to standards on identification and summary of evidence from 34.6% prior to 1990 to 36.1 % after 1995 (P = .11). There was no difference in the mean number of standards satisfied by guidelines produced by subspecialty medical societies, general medical societies, or government agencies (P = .55). Guideline length was positively correlated with adherence to methodological standards (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Guidelines published in the peer-reviewed medical literature during the past decade do not adhere well to established methodological standards. While all areas of guideline development need improvement, greatest improvement is needed in the identification, evaluation, and synthesis of the scientific evidence.
The AAMR/IASSID practice guidelines, developed by an international workgroup, provide guidance for stage-related care management of Alzheimer's disease, and suggestions for the training and education of carers, peers, clinicians and programme staff. The guidelines suggest a three-step intervention activity process, that includes: (1) recognizing changes; (2) conducting assessments and evaluations; and (3) instituting medical and care management. They also provide guidance for public policies that reflect a commitment for aggressive care of people with Alzheimers's disease and intellectual disability, and avoidance of institutionalization solely because of a diagnosis of dementia.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Promulgation of practice guidelines in medicine has increased interest in the structure of clinical policy making. It is argued that with a generic definition of policy as "the rules governing the behavior of individuals or institutions," clinical policy making is analogous to legislative policy making. Practice guidelines emphasize the advantages of making clinical policy more explicit. The structure of legislative policy making has evolved over many years to meet the challenge of making both the policies and the process of policy making explicit. Processes to promulgate clinical policies may be able to exploit this experience to improve clinical policy making and thereby retain control of the process within medicine. Generic steps are outlined for making decisions with incomplete information; synthesis of facts, vested interests, and values; involvement of stakeholders; and implementation of policy. An illustration of the use of the generic steps to make and implement a clinical policy for cesarean birth follows, with evaluations of its impact on the behavior and satisfaction of clinical stakeholders.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The structure and organization of health care delivery are in the midst of rapid change. Health care providers from a variety of disciplines are being challenged to define their practice and the expected patient outcomes resulting from their processes of care delivery. Standards and clinical practice guidelines are important tools for enhancing the quality of health care delivery and for documenting care. The article describes a process for developing standards and clinical practice guidelines and presents an organizational scheme for them. Based on recommendations from diverse national groups, a format for practice guidelines is presented, and a system for implementation and ongoing evaluation is recommended.
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines are increasingly being used for a wide variety of medical conditions, but not enough is known about physicians' attitudes and beliefs about guidelines, how often and under what circumstances they are used, and factors associated with their acceptance. OBJECTIVE: To determine practice guideline attitudes, beliefs, practices, and factors associated with use among a representative national sample of general pediatricians. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional mail survey. SUBJECTS: Random sample of general pediatrician members of the American Academy of Pediatrics residing in all 50 states and Puerto Rico. SURVEY INSTRUMENT: Twenty-four multiple-choice, Likert scale, yes-no, and open-ended questions about pediatric clinical practice guidelines. RESULTS: From 1088 respondents, 461 specialists were excluded; the remaining 627 general pediatricians were mostly male (61%), white (81%), and in group practice (62%) in a suburban location (48%). Practice guidelines are used by 35% of pediatricians, in part by 44%, and not at all by 21%. Over 100 different practice guidelines are used, most commonly for asthma (77%), hyperbilirubinemia (27%), and otitis media (19%). Common reasons for use of practice guidelines include standardization of care (17%) and helpfulness (10%). Commonly cited problems with practice guidelines include failure to allow for clinical judgment (54%), use in litigation (16%), and limitation of autonomy (5%). In multivariate analysis, the odds of practice guideline use were greater among pediatricians in health maintenance organization practices (odds ratio [OR]: 9.1; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-68.0) and those who were nonwhite (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1-4.8), but lower in those with more weekly patient visits (OR:.7; 95% CI:.5-.9). Features most likely to lead to practice guideline use include simplicity (16%), feasibility (12%), and evidence of improved outcomes (10%). Most pediatricians agree that practice guidelines improve outcomes (89%), are motivated by a desire to improve quality (94%), and should not be used in litigation (82%) or disciplinary actions (77%), nor be motivated by a desire to reduce costs (73%). CONCLUSIONS: Most general pediatricians use practice guidelines, but no specific guidelines, except those for asthma, are used by >27% of pediatricians. The results of this study suggest that practice guidelines are most likely to be followed if they are simple, flexible, rigorously tested, not used punitively, and are motivated by desires to improve quality, not reduce costs.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVES: Assess the acceptance and ease of use of Nutrition Practice Guidelines for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus by dietitians in a variety of settings; determine if nutrition care activities of dietitians change when practice guidelines are available; measure changes in patient control of blood glucose level, measured as glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c); compare patient satisfaction with care and perceptions about quality of life. DESIGN: Using the approach of outcomes research, volunteer dietitians were recruited and assigned randomly to a usual care group or a practice guidelines group. Patients with type 1 diabetes were enrolled by dietitians and followed up for a 3-month period. Outcome measures included dietitian care activities, changes in patient HbA1c levels, and patient satisfaction and perceptions about quality of life. SUBJECTS/SETTINGS: Dietitians from across the United States who responded to a recruitment notice participated. Their work settings included diabetes referral centers, endocrinology clinics, primary care and community health clinics, hospitals, and a worksite clinic. They recruited patients from their setting for the study. Outcome data were available from dietitians providing care to 24 patients using the new practice guidelines and dietitians providing care to 30 patients using more traditional methods. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: chi 2 Test, t test, and analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Dietitians in the practice guidelines group spent 63% more time with patients and were more likely to do an assessment and discuss results with patients than dietitians in the usual care group. Practice guidelines dietitians paid greater attention to glycemic control goals. Levels of HbA1c improved at 3 months in 21 (88%) of practice guidelines patients compared with 16 (53%) of usual care patients. Practice guidelines patients achieved greater reductions in HbA1c level than usual care patients (-1.00 vs -0.33). This difference was statistically significant and clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS/APPLICATIONS: Dietitians responded positively to practice guidelines for type 1 diabetes. Use of guidelines resulted in changes in dietitian practices and produced greater improvements in patient blood glucose outcomes at 3 months compared with usual care. Practice guidelines did not significantly influence patient satisfaction with care of perceived quality of life.
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are systematically developed statements to assist practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances. The implications of this definition are that: the methodologic perspective and operations for systematic development must be specified, a strategy is needed to account for the patient's perspective in the CPG development process and the clinical decision, and a mechanism is required to determine how appropriateness ought to be conceptualized and defined. Addressing these issues, we review models of CPG development, outline challenges to evidence-based approaches to CPG development, address unique factors relevant to the development of guidelines for the surgical community, introduce an Ontario practice guidelines strategy that uses complementary methods of CPG development, and summarize the feedback provided by the surgical community regarding the practice guidelines produced in Ontario's cancer system.
BACKGROUND: Important efforts have been invested in the past few years in the development of quality clinical guidelines. However, the means for the effective dissemination of guidelines to practicing physicians have not been determined. Several studies have examined the possibilities offered by the World Wide Web (the Web), but studies examining the implementation of clinical guidelines in actual practice are clearly lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the potential of the Web to implement clinical practice guidelines in actual clinical settings. It also documents the obstacles perceived by the physicians in their use of guidelines on the Internet to determine the role that the Web can play in the implementation of guidelines in practice. METHODS: Two guidelines were developed using a standardized panel method and made available via the Web. One concerned indications for low-back surgery and the other dealt with indications for upper and lower digestive endoscopies. To identify obstacles to their use in clinical practice, 20 physicians were asked to consult the guidelines during consultations with patients. Answers were collected using 3 different questionnaires. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed for consultations involving 213 patients. Less than 50% of the physicians have direct access to the Internet in their examination room. For 75%, the use of the guidelines was easy and the time required to consult them acceptable (3.4 minutes on average, or 12% of the time spent with the patient). The fear that use of such guidelines might interfere with the physician-patient relationship was mentioned as a reason for not consulting the guidelines for 27 consultations. Taking into account their experience with the Web, 75% of the physicians considered that the Web has a great or very-great potential for the dissemination of guidelines and 78% indicated that they would use such guidelines if they became generally available for clinical questions that concerned them. Only 3 physicians had consulted guidelines on the Web prior to this study. CONCLUSIONS: The acceptance of use of clinical practice guidelines via the Web is high. The main limits to further use of such Web-based guidelines seem to be the lack of a computer connection in the physician's office or examining room and the fear that use of such guidelines might interfere with the physician-patient relationship. Though most participants appreciate the considerable potential of the Web for disseminating guidelines, only a small handful regularly use guidelines available on the Web. There are still numerous obstacles to the regular use of guidelines in clinical practice, some related to the physicians, others to the guidelines themselves.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.