BACKGROUND: Because there is increasing concern that economic data are not used in the clinical guideline development process, our objective was to evaluate the extent to which economic analyses are incorporated in guideline development. METHODS: We searched medline and HealthSTAR databases to identify English-language clinical practice guidelines (1996-1999) and economic analyses (1990-1998). Additional guidelines were obtained from The National Guidelines Clearinghouse Internet site available at http://www.guideline.gov. Eligible guidelines met the Institute of Medicine definition and addressed a topic included in an economic analysis. Eligible economic analyses assessed interventions addressed in a guideline and predated the guideline by 1 or more years. Economic analyses were defined as incorporated in guideline development if 1) the economic analysis or the results were mentioned in the text or 2) listed as a reference. The quality of economic analyses was assessed using a structured scoring system. RESULTS: Using guidelines as the unit of analysis, 9 of 35 (26%) incorporated at least 1 economic analysis of above-average quality in the text and 11 of 35 (31%) incorporated at least 1 in the references. Using economic analyses as the unit of analysis, 63 economic analyses of above-average quality had opportunities for incorporation in 198 instances across the 35 guidelines. Economic analyses were incorporated in the text in 13 of 198 instances (7%) and in the references in 18 of 198 instances (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous economic analyses may be infrequently incorporated in the development of clinical practice guidelines. A systematic approach to guideline development should be used to ensure the consideration of economic analyses so that recommendations from guidelines may impact both the quality of care and the efficient allocation of resources.
BACKGROUND: Because there is increasing concern that economic data are not used in the clinical guideline development process, our objective was to evaluate the extent to which economic analyses are incorporated in guideline development. METHODS: We searched medline and HealthSTAR databases to identify English-language clinical practice guidelines (1996-1999) and economic analyses (1990-1998). Additional guidelines were obtained from The National Guidelines Clearinghouse Internet site available at http://www.guideline.gov. Eligible guidelines met the Institute of Medicine definition and addressed a topic included in an economic analysis. Eligible economic analyses assessed interventions addressed in a guideline and predated the guideline by 1 or more years. Economic analyses were defined as incorporated in guideline development if 1) the economic analysis or the results were mentioned in the text or 2) listed as a reference. The quality of economic analyses was assessed using a structured scoring system. RESULTS: Using guidelines as the unit of analysis, 9 of 35 (26%) incorporated at least 1 economic analysis of above-average quality in the text and 11 of 35 (31%) incorporated at least 1 in the references. Using economic analyses as the unit of analysis, 63 economic analyses of above-average quality had opportunities for incorporation in 198 instances across the 35 guidelines. Economic analyses were incorporated in the text in 13 of 198 instances (7%) and in the references in 18 of 198 instances (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous economic analyses may be infrequently incorporated in the development of clinical practice guidelines. A systematic approach to guideline development should be used to ensure the consideration of economic analyses so that recommendations from guidelines may impact both the quality of care and the efficient allocation of resources.
Authors: H M Krumholz; R C Pasternak; M C Weinstein; G C Friesinger; P M Ridker; A N Tosteson; L Goldman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1992-07-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R A Windsor; J B Lowe; L L Perkins; D Smith-Yoder; L Artz; M Crawford; K Amburgy; N R Boyd Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1993-02 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: J Machecourt; J Dumoulin; J Calop; L Foroni; M P Terisse; T Henon; G Vanzetto; B Denis; J P Bassand; J Cassagnes Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 1993-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Scott W Klarenbach; Finlay A McAlister; Helen Johansen; Karen Tu; Maureen Hazel; Robin Walker; Kelly B Zarnke; Norman R C Campbell Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Andrea Seiffert; Carlos Zaror; Claudia Atala-Acevedo; Andrea Ormeño; María José Martínez-Zapata; Pablo Alonso-Coello Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2018-03-09 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Paul E M Muijrers; Rob Janknegt; Jildou Sijbrandij; Richard P T M Grol; J André Knottnerus Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2004-10-26 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Fainareti N Zervou; Ioannis M Zacharioudakis; Elina Eleftheria Pliakos; Christos A Grigoras; Panayiotis D Ziakas; Eleftherios Mylonakis Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 1.817