Literature DB >> 10947551

Do clinical practice guidelines reflect research evidence?

I Savoie1, A Kazanjian, K Bassett.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether existing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for cholesterol testing reflect research evidence and hence may control or reduce costs while maintaining or improving the quality of care.
METHODS: A systematic search for published and unpublished cholesterol testing CPGs and independent critical appraisal of the CPGs by two researchers using a standard checklist.
RESULTS: In four of the five CPGs analysed, the link between the research evidence and the recommendations was not maintained. The appraisal, local experience and the literature all suggest that panel composition is an important explanation, in that the greater the involvement of clinical experts in the development process of the CPGs, the less the recommendations reflected the research evidence. Even though their participation is important for CPG uptake, clinical expert panels appear to have difficulty limiting CPGs to research-based recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS: Existing cholesterol testing CPGs are unlikely to improve the quality of care while controlling or reducing costs. The problem lies not with guideline implementation but with the guidelines themselves. It is unclear how best to ensure that recommendations reflect research evidence but this is likely to require significant and progressive changes to the current guideline development process, including a redefinition of the clinical experts' role.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10947551     DOI: 10.1177/135581960000500204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  9 in total

1.  Evidence based policy: proceed with care.

Authors:  N Black
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-08-04

Review 2.  Developing clinical guidelines: a challenge to current methods.

Authors:  Rosalind Raine; Colin Sanderson; Nick Black
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-09-17

3.  The wrong tool for the job: diabetes public health programs and practice guidelines.

Authors:  Urmimala Sarkar; Andrea López; Karen Black; Dean Schillinger
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  An experimental study of determinants of the extent of disagreement within clinical guideline development groups.

Authors:  A Hutchings; R Raine; C Sanderson; N Black
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-08

5.  The basis for monitoring strategies in clinical guidelines: a case study of prostate-specific antigen for monitoring in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jacqueline Dinnes; Jenny Hewison; Douglas G Altman; Jonathan J Deeks
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-12-12       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Methods underpinning national clinical guidelines for hypertension: describing the evidence shortfall.

Authors:  Fiona Campbell; Heather O Dickinson; Julia V F Cook; Fiona R Beyer; Martin Eccles; James M Mason
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-04-05       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Knowledge Translation Tools are Emerging to Move Neck Pain Research into Practice.

Authors:  Joy C Macdermid; Jordan Miller; Anita R Gross
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2013-09-20

8.  Reliability and validity of the AGREE instrument used by physical therapists in assessment of clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Joy C MacDermid; Dina Brooks; Sherra Solway; Sharon Switzer-McIntyre; Lucie Brosseau; Ian D Graham
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-03-02       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 9.  Appraisal tools for clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ulrich Siering; Michaela Eikermann; Elke Hausner; Wiebke Hoffmann-Eßer; Edmund A Neugebauer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.