Literature DB >> 9589550

Spine update. Patient preferences and the development of practice guidelines.

D K Owens1.   

Abstract

One shortcoming of clinical practice guidelines is that generic, one-for-all guideline recommendations do not account for differences among patients' views about the desirability (or undesirability) of specific health outcomes, such as low back pain. Because differences in patients' preferences may lead to differences in the preferred therapy, a clinical practice guideline that does not consider patients' preferences may provide recommendations that are not optimal. Recently developed methodologic approaches enable guideline developers to assess the role of patients' preferences in clinical decisions and guideline recommendations, and to develop preference-based guidelines. Preference-based guidelines are more likely to meet criteria for high-quality guidelines than are guidelines developed without consideration of the role of patients' preferences. Guideline developers should identify decisions in which patient preferences are important and note these decisions clearly in the written guideline; indicate the specific health states for which preferences are important; and, if possible, provide recommendations about options for preference assessment. These options range from informal discussions with patients to computer-based utility assessments. Patients' preferences are an important factor in clinical decisions regarding management of low-back pain, particularly in decisions about surgical management and symptom control. Although further research is needed to define the role of techniques for assessing patients' preferences in routine clinical practice, guideline developers can determine when patients' preferences should play a prominent role in guideline recommendations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9589550     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199805010-00023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  16 in total

1.  Giving medicine a fair trial. Patients' preferences should be assessed.

Authors:  L Allan; L Tooke
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-12-16

2.  The involvement of gynaecological patients in the development of a clinical guideline for resumption of (work) activities in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Carina A C M Pittens; Antonie Vonk Noordegraaf; Saskia C van Veen; Johannes R Anema; Judith A F Huirne; Jacqueline E W Broerse
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 3.  How well do guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences?

Authors:  Christopher A K Y Chong; Ing-je Chen; Gary Naglie; Murray D Krahn
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  What outcomes matter to patients?

Authors:  C D Sherbourne; R Sturm; K B Wells
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Quality-of-life assessment in osteoporosis: health-status and preference-based measures.

Authors:  Anna N A Tosteson; Cristina S Hammond
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Monitoring and evaluation of patient involvement in clinical practice guideline development: lessons from the Multidisciplinary Guideline for Employment and Severe Mental Illness, the Netherlands.

Authors:  Alida J van der Ham; Nicole van Erp; Jacqueline E W Broerse
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Criterion validity of the ARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire: patient satisfaction with treatment and need for switching therapy.

Authors:  Javier Rejas; Jordi Monfort; Miguel A Campillo; Miguel A Ruiz; Antonio Pardo; Javier Soto
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.859

8.  How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol.

Authors:  Trudy van der Weijden; France Légaré; Antoine Boivin; Jako S Burgers; Haske van Veenendaal; Anne M Stiggelbout; Marjan Faber; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Reconsidering patient participation in guideline development.

Authors:  Hester M van de Bovenkamp; Margo J Trappenburg
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2008-12-20

10.  Shared decision making does not influence physicians against clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Mireille Guerrier; France Légaré; Stéphane Turcotte; Michel Labrecque; Louis-Paul Rivest
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.