scholarly journals Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infection: 2009 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

2009 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard A. Mermel ◽  
Michael Allon ◽  
Emilio Bouza ◽  
Donald E. Craven ◽  
Patricia Flynn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Intravascular Catheter ◽  
Management Guidelines

Abstract These updated guidelines replace the previous management guidelines published in 2001. The guidelines are intended for use by health care providers who care for patients who either have these infections or may be at risk for them.

scholarly journals The Management of Encephalitis: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan R. Tunkel ◽  
Carol A. Glaser ◽  
Karen C. Bloch ◽  
James J. Sejvar ◽  
Christina M. Marra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Etiologic Agents

Abstract Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with encephalitis were prepared by an Expert Panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. The guidelines are intended for use by health care providers who care for patients with encephalitis. The guideline includes data on the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment of many viral, bacterial, fungal, protozoal, and helminthic etiologies of encephalitis and provides information on when specific etiologic agents should be considered in individual patients with encephalitis.

scholarly journals The impact of acute care clinical practice guidelines on length of stay: A closer look at some conflicting findings

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moriah Ellen ◽  
G. Ross Baker ◽  
Adalsteinn Brown
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Organizational Support ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
The Impact

Systematic reviews have found that clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are associated with lower lengths of stay (LOS), but a secondary analysis of Ontario acute care hospitals found few significant relationships between CPGs and LOS. This research explored possible reasons for these findings and what other factors may impact the CPG-LOS relationship. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff from nine hospitals whose jobs dealt with developing, implementing, monitoring, updating, or evaluating CPGs. Interviews were analyzed utilizing methods outlined by Aurebach. A variety of leaders and hospital types were represented. Five main factors influencing relationships between CPGs and LOS were identified: 1) the purpose of implementation, 2) evidence base for CPG content and selection, 3) health care professionals’ response to change and compliance, 4) dissemination strategies, and 5) organizational support and resources. The interviews suggested possible reasons why CPGs are not realizing their full potential impact on LOS in Ontario hospitals, ranging from poor compliance to resistance from health care providers. CPGs themselves are not perceived to be the reason for ineffectiveness; rather, organizational- and individual-level barriers seem to be the causes.

Primer on Clinical Practice Guidelines

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunice Y. Pyon
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Improve Patient Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Quality Guideline

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are valuable tools for health care providers and support evidence-based medicine (EBM). Many organizations, including medical associations and government-affiliated agencies, develop and publish guidelines using varying methods. Unfortunately, many guidelines are not appropriately developed and certain recommendations are not based on the best available evidence. Recent efforts by EBM advocates are contributing to the improved quality of CPGs and more tools are becoming available to promote high-quality guideline development and use. This article describes the guideline development process and associated concerns and the advances in the field of CPGs. Tools to access and evaluate guidelines are also provided. Health care professionals equipped with an understanding of the process of guideline creation and tools for evaluation can appropriately utilize guidelines to improve patient care.

scholarly journals Health care providers’ weight management practices for adolescent obesity and alignment with clinical practice guidelines: a multi-centre, qualitative study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Kebbe ◽  
A. Perez ◽  
A. Buchholz ◽  
S. D. Scott ◽  
T.-L. F. McHugh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Weight Management ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Pediatric Obesity ◽  
Care Providers

Abstract Background Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) include evidence-based recommendations for managing obesity in adolescents. However, information on how health care providers (HCPs) implement these recommendations in day-to-day practice is limited. Our objectives were to explore how HCPs deliver weight management health services to adolescents with obesity and describe the extent to which their reported practices align with recent CPGs for managing pediatric obesity. Methods From July 2017 to January 2018, we conducted a qualitative study that used purposeful sampling to recruit HCPs with experience in adolescent weight management from multidisciplinary, pediatric weight management clinics in Edmonton and Ottawa, Canada. Data were collected using audio-recorded focus groups (4–6 participants/group; 60–90 min in length). We applied inductive, semantic thematic analysis and the congruent methodological approach to analyze our data, which included transcripts, field notes, and memos. Qualitative data were compared to recent CPGs for pediatric obesity that were published by the Endocrine Society in 2017. Of the 12 obesity ‘treatment-related’ recommendations, four were directly relevant to the current study. Results Data were collected through three focus groups with 16 HCPs (n = 10 Edmonton; n = 6 Ottawa; 94% female; 100% Caucasian), including dietitians, exercise specialists, nurses, pediatricians, psychologists, and social workers. We identified three main themes that we later compared with CPG recommendations, including: (i) discuss realistic expectations regarding weight management (e.g., shift focus from weight to health; explore family cohesiveness; foster delayed vs instant gratification), (ii) personalize weight management (e.g., address personal barriers to change; consider developmental readiness), and (iii) exhibit non-biased attitudes and practices (e.g., de-emphasize individual causes of obesity; avoid making assumptions about lifestyle behaviors based on weight). Based on these qualitative findings, HCPs applied all four CPG recommendations in their practices. Conclusions HCPs provided practical insights into what and how they delivered weight management for adolescents, which included operationalizing relevant CPG recommendations in their practices.

Co-Sleeping and Bed Sharing in Postnatal Maternity Units

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassia Drever-Smith ◽  
Fiona Bogossian ◽  
Karen New
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Maternal Education ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Primary Research ◽  
Bed Sharing ◽  
Standard Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND: This 2-part article reviews the primary research on co-sleeping and bed sharing in maternity units and critiques clinical practice guidelines on co-sleeping and bed sharing in maternity units.METHODS: Electronic search strategies were used to identify primary research and to access clinical practice guidelines about co-sleeping and bed sharing on maternity units. Primary research was reviewed and compared. Clinical practice guidelines were critiqued against the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF; 2004) document, Babies sharing their mothers’ bed while in hospital: A sample policy.FINDINGS: There is little published primary research about co-sleeping and bed sharing in maternity units but that which is available is of high standard. Clinical practice guidelines are more plentiful but vary in quality and scope. The primary research and clinical practice guidelines recognize the positive correlates between co-sleeping and bed sharing and the establishment of breastfeeding and the potential for risks to infant safety. There are differences in the acceptance of co-sleeping and bed sharing between geographic regions. The role of health care providers in educating about the benefits and risks of co-sleeping and bed sharing in maternity units is acknowledged but not well explored.CONCLUSION: Further research on co-sleeping and bed sharing in maternity units is needed to provide evidence to inform clinical practice guidelines.KEYWORDS: infant sleep location; policy development and dissemination; risk assessment; maternal education and behavior modeling; co-sleeping; bed sharing

scholarly journals Development and Implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines: An Update and Synthesis of the Literature With a Focus in Application to Spinal Conditions

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 53S-64S
Author(s):  
Lindsay Tetreault ◽  
Anick Nater ◽  
Philip Garwood ◽  
Jetan H. Badhiwala ◽  
Jefferson R. Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Review Team

Study Design: Review. Objectives: The objectives of this review are to ( a) summarize the role of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), ( b) outline the methodology involved in formulating CPGs, ( c) provide an illustration of these principles using a CPG developed for degenerative cervical myelopathy, and ( d) highlight the importance of knowledge translation. Methods: A review of the literature was conducted to summarize current standards in CPG development and implementation. Results: CPGs are systematically developed statements intended to affect decisions made by health care providers, policy makers, and patients. The main objectives of CPGs are to synthesize and translate evidence into recommendations, optimize patient outcomes, standardize care, and facilitate shared decision making among physicians, patients, and their caregivers. The main steps involved in the development of CPGs include defining the clinical problem, assembling a multidisciplinary guideline development group and systematic review team, conducting a systematic review of the literature, translating the evidence to recommendations, critically appraising the CPG and updating the document when new studies arise. The final step in developing a CPG is to implement it into clinical practice; this step requires an assessment of the barriers to implementation and the formulation of effective dissemination strategies. Conclusion: CPGs are an important component in the teaching and practice of medicine and are available for a wide spectrum of diseases. CPGs, however, can only be used to influence clinical practice if the recommendations are informed by a systematic review of the literature and developed using rigorous methodology. The opportunity to transform clinical management of spinal conditions is an attractive outcome of the application of high-quality CPGs.

scholarly journals Determinants of clinical practice guidelines’ utilization for the management of musculoskeletal disorders: a scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Delphine Sorondo ◽  
Cyrille Delpierre ◽  
Pierre Côté ◽  
Louis-Rachid Salmi ◽  
Christine Cedraschi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract Context Many clinical practice guidelines have been developed for the management of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). However, there is a gap between evidence-based knowledge and clinical practice, and reasons are poorly understood. Understanding why healthcare providers use clinical practice guidelines is essential to improve their implementation, dissemination, and adherence. Aim To identify determinants of clinical practice guidelines’ utilization by health care providers involved in the assessment and management of MSDs. Method A scoping review of the literature was conducted. Three databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Article identification, study design, methodological quality, type of healthcare providers, MSDs, barriers and facilitators associated with guidelines’ utilization were extracted from selected articles. RESULTS: 8671 citations were retrieved, and 43 articles were selected. 51% of studies were from Europe, and most were quantitative studies (64%) following a cross-sectional design (88%). Almost 80% of articles dealt with low back pain guidelines, and the most studied healthcare providers were general practitioners or physiotherapists. Five main barriers to guideline utilization were expressed by providers: 1) disagreement between recommendations and patient expectations; 2) guidelines not specific to individual patients; 3) unfamiliarity with “non-specific” term, or with the bio psychosocial model of MSDs; 4) time consuming; and 5) heterogeneity in guideline methods. Four main facilitators to guideline utilization were cited: 1) clinician’s interest in evidence-based practice; 2) perception from clinicians that the guideline will improve triage, diagnosis and management; 3) time efficiency; and 4) standardized language. Conclusion Identifying modifiable determinants is the first step in developing implementation strategies to improve guideline utilization in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Determinants of clinical practice guidelines’ utilization for the management of musculoskeletal disorders: A scoping review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delphine Sorondo ◽  
Cyrille Delpierre ◽  
Pierre Côté ◽  
Louis-Rachid Salmi ◽  
Christine Cedraschi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract CONTEXT: Many clinical practice guidelines have been developed for the management of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). However, there is a gap between evidence-based knowledge and clinical practice, and reasons are poorly understood. Understanding why healthcare providers use clinical practice guidelines is essential to improve their implementation, dissemination, and adherence.AIM: To identify determinants of clinical practice guidelines’ utilization by health care providers involved in the assessment and management of MSDs.METHOD: A scoping review of the literature was conducted. Three databases were searched from inception to December 2019. Article identification, study design, methodological quality, type of healthcare providers, MSDs, barriers and facilitators associated with guidelines’ utilization were extracted from selected articles.RESULTS: 7667 citations were retrieved, and 43 articles were selected. 51% of studies were from Europe, and most were quantitative studies (64%) following a cross-sectional design (88%). Almost 80% of articles dealt with low back pain guidelines, and the most studied healthcare providers were general practitioners or physiotherapists. Five main barriers to guideline utilization were expressed by providers: 1) disagreement between recommendations and patient expectations; 2) guidelines not specific to individual patients; 3) unfamiliarity with “non-specific” term, or with the bio psychosocial model of MSDs; 4) time consuming; and 5) heterogeneity in guideline methods. Four main facilitators to guideline utilization were cited: 1) clinician’s interest in evidence-based practice; 2) perception from clinicians that the guideline will improve triage, diagnosis and management; 3) time efficiency; and 4) standardized language.CONCLUSION: Identifying modifiable determinants is the first step in developing implementation strategies to improve guideline utilization in clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document