Literature DB >> 10428005

Analysis of the practice guidelines of the Dutch College of General Practitioners with respect to the use of blood tests.

M A van Wijk1, A M Bohnen, J van der Lei.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the consistency among the practice guidelines of the Dutch College of General Practitioners with respect to the use of blood tests.
METHODS: The authors evaluated 64 practice guidelines of the Dutch College of General Practitioners. For each guideline, they analyzed each sentence that contained a reference to a blood test to determine the clinical situation in which the test should be performed (the indication) and to determine the tests that should be performed in that situation (the recommended test). An incomplete recommendation refers to a guideline that mentioned a blood test but did not identify the indication for that test. An inconsistency refers to the situation in which one guideline recommended a certain test for a given indication whereas another guideline mentioned the same indication but did not recommend the same test.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven practice guidelines mentioned blood tests. Of these, three explicitly recommended not to request blood tests. Five guidelines contained incomplete recommendations, and the authors encountered two inconsistencies among the guidelines. Twenty-three guidelines mentioned blood tests and allowed the authors to identify indications and recommended tests.
CONCLUSION: The identification of indications and recommended tests allows evaluation of consistency among practice guidelines. Although some incomplete recommendations and inconsistencies were discovered, the majority of the guidelines provide clear and unambiguous recommendations for blood-test ordering in primary care.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10428005      PMCID: PMC61373          DOI: 10.1136/jamia.1999.0060322

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  22 in total

Review 1.  Words without action? The production, dissemination, and impact of consensus recommendations.

Authors:  J Lomas
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 21.981

2.  The computer and clinical decision-support systems in primary care.

Authors:  T R Taylor
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 0.493

Review 3.  The demise of the "Greek Oracle" model for medical diagnostic systems.

Authors:  R A Miller; F E Masarie
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 2.176

4.  Effect of population-based interventions on laboratory utilization: a time-series analysis.

Authors:  C van Walraven; V Goel; B Chan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-12-16       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Our stubborn quest for diagnostic certainty. A cause of excessive testing.

Authors:  J P Kassirer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-06-01       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 6.  Do practice guidelines guide practice? The effect of a consensus statement on the practice of physicians.

Authors:  J Lomas; G M Anderson; K Domnick-Pierre; E Vayda; M W Enkin; W J Hannah
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-11-09       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Knowledge engineering for a clinical trial advice system: uncovering errors in protocol specification.

Authors:  M A Musen; J A Rohn; L M Fagan; E H Shortliffe
Journal:  Bull Cancer       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 1.276

Review 8.  Influencing behavior of physicians ordering laboratory tests: a literature study.

Authors:  P Axt-Adam; J C van der Wouden; E van der Does
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  The effect on test ordering of informing physicians of the charges for outpatient diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W M Tierney; M E Miller; C J McDonald
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-05-24       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 10.  Diagnostic reasoning.

Authors:  J P Kassirer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1989-06-01       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  1 in total

1.  Appropriateness: analysis of outpatient radiology requests.

Authors:  M Cristofaro; E Busi Rizzi; V Schininà; D Chiappetta; C Angeletti; C Bibbolino
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 3.469

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.