Clinical practice guidelines: a critical review

PURPOSE: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed for many years with the aim of improving the quality of care. A review of the use of CPGs and assessments of CPG compliance among practitioners so far would aid the understanding of factors influencing CPG compliance. This study seeks to provide this. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A general review and discussion of CPGs in areas of their attributes, benefits and pitfalls were carried out. Articles concerning the assessment of CPG compliance were also reviewed to understand the kind of data collected for such assessments (qualitative vs quantitative), the methods used to collect data (objective versus subjective), and the assessment measures employed (process versus outcome). FINDINGS: A total of 57 CPG compliance assessment studies were reviewed. Almost two-thirds employed objective methods. Of the subjective assessments, 47 per cent analysed solely quantitative data, 32 per cent analysed solely qualitative information and 21 per cent analysed both. More than four-fifths of all studies used process measures to determine CPG compliance and only 5 per cent used solely outcome measures. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Depending on the methods used, assessments can help identify various factors influencing CPG compliance. Such factors may be related to the physician, guidelines, health system or patient. A good understanding of these factors and their role in influencing compliance behaviour will help health regulators and administrators plan better and more effective strategies to improve doctors' CPG compliance. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This review looks at the various aspects of CPGs to understand how these influence practitioners' compliance.     

The logic behind a multimethod intervention to improve adherence to clinical practice guidelines in a nationwide network of primary care practices

The gap between evidence-based guidelines for clinical care and their application in medical settings is well established and widely discussed. Effective interventions are needed to help health care providers reduce this gap. Whereas the development of clinical practice guidelines from biomedical and clinical research is an example of Type 1 translation, Type 2 translation involves successful implementation of guidelines in clinical practice. This article describes a multimethod intervention that is part of a Type 2 translation project aimed at increasing adherence to clinical practice guidelines in a nationwide network of primary care practices that use a common electronic medical record (EMR). Practice performance reports, site visits, and network meetings are intervention methods designed to stimulate improvement in practices by addressing personal and organizational factors. Theories and evidence supporting these interventions are described and could prove useful to others trying to translate medical research into practice. Additional theory development is needed to support translation in medical offices.     

AHRQ tool designed to improve CAP clinical care

Tool helps docs decide whether to hospitalize community-acquired pneumonia patients. Pneumonia Severity Index clinical algorithm developed by AHRQ team. Agency hopes to develop several more similar tools.     

Clinical practice guidelines and primary care. SESPAS report 2012

Clinical practice guidelines are intended to serve as a bridge between the decision levels and the sources of knowledge, giving decision makers the best synthesis of scientific evidence and an analysis of context, to provide elements of judgement and to transfer scientific knowledge into clinical practice. However, the actual impact on health care is variable and effectiveness in changing medical practice, moderate. Qualitative and quantitative studies show that most primary care physicians consider that the guides are a valuable source of advice and training and a kind of improving the quality of healthcare. However, they underline its rigidity, the difficulty to apply to individual patients and that their main goal is to reduce healthcare costs. In Spain, there are several experiences as GuíaSalud in developing clinical practice guidelines aimed specifically at primary care. However, the proper implementation of a clinical practice guideline includes not only the quality and thoroughness of the evidence, but the credibility of professionals and organizations and other contextual factors such as characteristics of patients, providers and organizations or systems. An important step in future research is to develop a better theoretical understanding of organizational change that is required for management and professionals to give appropriate guidance to the implementation of the clinical practice guidelines.     

HIV infection and care pathway: From guidelines to clinical practice

Objectives

To quantify within a cohort of HIV-infected individuals the number of medical visits and procedures to be carried out according to comorbidities and risk factors to implement a personalized care pathway.

From theory to practice: identifying authentic opinion leaders to improve care

Diffusion of Innovations and Opinion Leader theories can be translated into practical applications to improve health care delivery and financial performance by applying them to influence referral patterns and decrease variations in care. Health care organizations can rapidly spread "better practices" to their practicing physicians by understanding the social and communication networks that are naturally developed by those practitioners. Physicians view this diffusion process as promoting autonomy, and as a legitimate approach to adoption of information needed in daily practice.     

Outreach visits to improve dementia care in general practice: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Outreach visits reflect newer developments in adult learning theory, where the learner is actively involved in the session. Previous studies have indicated a positive effect of outreach visits on GPs' behaviour. However, the empirical role of the facilitator in the visits is poorly described. OBJECTIVE: To explore general practitioners' perception of the outcome of a facilitator programme about dementia, in relation to central aspects of the facilitator's communicative role during the visits. METHOD: Observational studies, and focus group discussions with participating general practitioners (3 groups, 19 participants) as well as with facilitators (4 participants) in Vejle County, Denmark. RESULTS: Facilitators drew both on a 'factual' knowledge of dementia and a more 'experience-based' knowledge when conveying programme messages. They described themselves as 'carriers of experience'. All general practitioners described an outcome of the programme, and all wished to receive a future visit by a facilitator on new topics. The outcome was described not as ground-breaking medical news, but as practical effects in terms of knowledge of dementia, motivation for working with dementia, structured assessment and management of dementia and critical reflection of established practices regarding dementia. Some general practitioners remained critical as to whether this outcome justified the resources used in the programme. The experience-based dialogue was described as central to the outcome as it linked factual knowledge to clinical practice. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that outreach visits contribute to the integration of factual knowledge in clinical practice, but it also underscores the importance of addressing tacit communicative practices during facilitator visits and their implications for the outcome of the programme.     

Strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice: are guidelines the answer?

BACKGROUND: GPs are ideally placed to recommend appropriate cancer screening for their patients. However, opportunities to discuss screening are often missed and screening procedures are not always recommended in accordance with national policy. The development of clinical practice guidelines represents one strategy for improving cancer screening in general practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to ascertain Australian GPs' ratings of current clinical practice guidelines and their views of the likely usefulness of 18 strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice. METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to a national random sample of 1271 GPs in May 1996. Responders rated the usefulness of each of eight clinical practice guidelines current at the time of the survey. They then rated the usefulness of each of 18 strategies for support of cancer screening. RESULTS: We received 855 completed questionnaires (a 67% response rate). There was greatest support for guidelines already available on breast and cervical cancer. The most popular strategy to improve cancer screening was seminars with experts in preventive care, rated as 'very useful' by 658 (77%), followed by NHMRC guidelines (597, 70%) and pamphlets for patients (587, 69%). There was less support for more innovative strategies including assessment and feedback (35%), case finding by nurse practitioners (11%) and academic detailing (10%). CONCLUSION: Responders indicated that strategies involving passive dissemination of information would be most useful for improving cancer screening in general practice. Identification of an effective combination of acceptable initiatives is needed.     

Clinical practice guidelines and critical paths--roadmaps to quality, cost-effective care (Part I)

Clinical practice guidelines and critical paths have gained widespread acceptance in recent years. Part I of this article will examine clinical practice guidelines, or practice parameters, and their application to patient care. Part II (in the February issue of JAHIMA) will look at multi-disciplinary care plans known as critical paths and how they can incorporate clinical practice guidelines. Health information management professionals can play an important role in implementation and ongoing evaluation of these clinical tools.     

Clinical practice guidelines and the cost of care. A growing alliance

Healthcare policy, medical practice, and cost of care are no longer considered distinct entities. Each is an integral factor in determining not only what, but how, patient care will be delivered. Clinical practice guidelines are the lynchpin that connects them. This paper addresses the various components of the clinical practice guideline--cost alliance. OBJECTIVE: To examine the bidirectional influence of choice of care on costs and of cost of care on decision making. METHODS: The literature was used to identify cost-related factors that influence development of guidelines and change in physician practice behavior. In a MEDLINE search with modifiers to the keywords "clinical practice guidelines," particular attention was paid to identifying surveys of practitioners. An analysis, prompted by a recently published guideline, of treating penetrating intraperitoneal colon injuries by different surgical approaches (primary repair versus diverting colostomy) exemplified how implementation of a guideline can affect the cost of care. Inpatient cost estimates, adjusted for medical inflation and cost-to-charge ratios and reported in 1999 U.S. dollars, were developed using data from 1996 and 1997 discharge databases from California and Massachusetts. RESULTS: The results showed that a substantial savings in hospital costs was achieved when a primary repair surgical technique, as advocated by the guideline, was used. The effect of cost influences on the development of clinical practice guidelines was established by demonstrating the cyclical effect between usual and customary practices, guideline implementation, changing practice patterns, and the economic considerations influencing the process. CONCLUSIONS: A growing, albeit uneasy, alliance between costs and clinical practice guidelines is evident.