scholarly journals Clinical Practice Guidelines andHelicobacter pyloriInfection in Children

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 560-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Macarthur ◽  
Liisa Jaakkimainen

The objective of this paper is to review the principles, methods and issues behind the development of clinical practice guidelines. Practice guidelines have been defined as “systematically developed statements to assist practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances”. The ultimate goal of guidelines is to improve patient outcomes; however, they may also be used as tools to decrease health care costs, improve medical education and enhance quality assurance. Evidence-based guidelines use explicit methods to link recommendations to the quality of the underlying research. Following development of the guideline, implementation and evaluation are key steps. The ultimate aim of guideline development is to influence physician knowledge, attitudes and behaviour.

Pulse ◽  
1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Anisur Rahman

Bangladesh is a country with a large population. The health care needs of this huge population are met by a plethora of health care workers many of whom are not even trained formally for this work (traditional healers). Even in those who are trained in formal medicine we find doctors with various academic background and training. There is an amulgation of medical degrees which is not seen anywhere else in the world. As a result the diagnostic and clinical approach to patient varies widely. This setup denies the patient the standard of care that he or she deserves. In this context clinical practice guidelines can play a major role in standard patient care. Clinical practice guidelines are systematically developed to assist practitioners’ and patients' decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances. Many terms have been developed including practice guidelines, practice standards, practice parameters, practice policies, protocols, algorithms, and critical paths, but the collective purpose is the same - reduction in unnecessary variability of care. Historically it started in USA, from attempts to monitor quality of care and cost of care. Experimental Medical Review Organizations were started in USA in 1971 by the National Center for Health Services Research and Development, which provided grants to assess quality of care. Legislation was signed into law as part of the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1989, creating the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) [1]. A guideline is a stepwise evaluation of a clinical diagnosis or management strategy that requires observations to be made, decisions to be considered, and actions to be taken. Processes used during development of guidelines include informal and formal consensus methods, evidence-based methods, and explicit methods. Informal consensus method leads to poor quality and have been largely abandoned. Formal consensus development, based on the delphi technique is a stepwise process leading to recommendations that reflect the extent of agreement amongst individuals. This technique is limited in that it does not rely on explicit linkage between recommendation and the quality of the evidence reviewed. Evidence based methods have emerged with specific rules defined to link recommendations and supporting evidence [2]. Basic Steps in Guideline Development [3], [4] have been standardized by various international bodies and may be implemented in our country with a few adjustments. There are still methodological problems that have been identified. These include the needs to further define consistent definitions, to avoid publication bias, to maintain sensitivity to evolution in scientific understanding, and to develop criteria for validity of clinical research methods. Economic factors affecting guideline development also need to be avoided and include specialist interests, payer interests, and the need to disclose economic self interests [5]. A final problem is the challenge of disseminating already written guidelines to physicians and presents a formidable task unto itself and adds to the large burden of new data and information practitioners already have available. Guidelines should, therefore, be viewed as broad templates to assist physicians or patients in various clinical circumstances [6]. Clinical practice guideline is becoming an important determinant of how medicine and surgery is practiced in Western societies. It is time that this strategy is also introduced in Bangladesh to reduce variability in care, improve quality, measure outcomes, and reduces costs. It is expected of such institution as BCPS, and the professional bodies like Society of Surgeons and Association of Physicians of Bangladesh to initiate and implement such clinical guidelines.Prof. Dr. Anisur RahmanSenior Consultant & CoordinatorDepartment of General and Laparoscopic SurgeryApollo Hospitals DhakaReferencesGosfield A. Clinical practice guidelines and the law: applications and implications. In: Health Law Handbook. New York: Clark Boardman Callaghan; 1994:67-99.Roper WL, Winkenwerder W, Hackharth GM, Krakauer H. Effectiveness in health care: an initiative to evaluate and improve medical practice. NEJM. 1988; 319:1197-1202.American Medical Association. Office of Quality Assurance. Attributes to Guide the Development of Practice Parameters. Chicago.Schoenbaum SC, Sundwall DN, Reqman D. Using Clinical Practice Guidelines to Evaluate Quality of Care. AHCPR 95-0045, 1995;1&2.Ayres JD. The Use and Abuse of Medical Practice Guidelines. J Legal Med. 1994; 15:421-443.Tunis SR, Hayward R, Wilson MC. Internists’ attitudes about clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 1994; 120:956-963.DOI: 10.3329/pulse.v3i1.6542Pulse Vol.3(1) July 2009 p.3


Sarcoma ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. J. Neuhaus ◽  
D. Thomas ◽  
J. Desai ◽  
C. Vuletich ◽  
J. von Dincklage ◽  
...  

In 2013 Australia introduced Wiki-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Adult Onset Sarcoma. These guidelines utilized a customized MediaWiki software application for guideline development and are the first evidence-based guidelines for clinical management of sarcoma. This paper presents our experience with developing and implementing web-based interactive guidelines and reviews some of the challenges and lessons from adopting an evidence-based (rather than consensus-based) approach to clinical sarcoma guidelines. Digital guidelines can be easily updated with new evidence, continuously reviewed and widely disseminated. They provide an accessible method of enabling clinicians and consumers to access evidence-based clinical practice recommendations and, as evidenced by over 2000 views in the first four months after release, with 49% of those visits being from countries outside of Australia. The lessons learned have relevance to other rare cancers in addition to the international sarcoma community.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Can Wang ◽  
Xufei Luo ◽  
Maichao Li ◽  
Lingling Cui ◽  
Xinde Li ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives The Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist was used to assess the reporting quality of 2009–2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) regarding gout and hyperuricemia, aimed to improve the reporting quality of future guidelines.Methods We searched PubMed, the Chinese Biomedical Literature database, the Wan Fang Database, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure from January 2009 to June 2019 for relevant guidelines. We also searched the websites of guideline development organizations (the Guidelines International Network, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the American College of Rheumatology, and the European League Against Rheumatism) (EULAR). Furthermore, supplementary guidelines reported in included articles were systematically searched, as well as Medlive and Google Scholar. Results Seventeen guidelines were included, of which one was in Chinese and 16 were in English. The mean reporting rate of the 35 items specified was 14.9 (42.5%), only five CPGs (29.4%) had a reporting rate >50%. Of the 35 items, three were very frequently reported. The reporting proportion of the seven domains (Basic information, Background, Evidence, Recommendations, Review and quality assurance, Funding and declaration and management of interests, and Other information) were 64.7%, 36.8%, 50.6% 50.6%, 42.9%, 8.82%, 33.8%, and 31.4%, respectively.Conclusion The reporting quality of the present guidelines for gout and hyperuricemia is relatively poor. We suggest that the RIGHT reporting checklist should be used by CPG developers to ensure higher reporting quality of future guidelines.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 294-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Hillary Steinhart ◽  
Aida Fernandes

A series of clinical practice guidelines were recently developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) to provide clinicians with recommendations for the medical management of nonhospitalized ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. These guidelines were developed, reviewed and agreed on by expert clinicians and methodologists. Following the finalization of the guidelines, a group of patients with UC as well as several inflammatory bowel disease clinicians, were brought together for a half-day workshop to provide feedback from the patient perspective. At the workshop, the guideline development process was described and the guidelines were reviewed to ensure comprehension. Patients then had the opportunity to provide their insight to the relevance of the guideline development process and the content of the guidelines as it related to their personal experiences with UC. The patient group believed that, although the new guidelines will be a tremendous resource for the health care provider community, a more ‘lay-friendly’ version would better facilitate dialogue between patients and their health care practitioners. The importance of the patient/physician relationship is paramount when making decisions regarding treatment plans, in which patient preferences play a key role in determining the most appropriate therapy and dosing regimen, which, in turn, impact the likelihood of adherence to the treatment plan. It was also believed that quality of life issues were not fully addressed in the guidelines. Much could be learned from shared experiences and coping strategies that would empower patients to take charge of their health and become equal partners with their care providers.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fan Huang ◽  
Yue Zhang ◽  
Chuyu Huang ◽  
Mingwang Qiu ◽  
Siyi Zhao ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of Tuina clinical practice guidelines. Methods Computer searches of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and other databases were conducted to search for published guidelines on Tuina, with a search time frame from database creation to March 2021. Four evaluators independently used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument to evaluate the quality of the included guidelines.Results Eight guidelines related to Tuina were included in this study. The quality of reporting was low in all included guidelines. The highest quality report had a total score of 404 and was rated as "highly recommended". The worst guideline had a final score of 241 and was rated as "not recommended". Overall, 25% of the included guidelines were recommended for clinical use, 37.5% were recommended after revision, and 37.5% were not recommended for use.Conclusion The number of existing Tuina clinical practice guidelines is limited. The methodological quality is low, far from the internationally accepted norms of clinical practice guideline development and reporting. In the future development of Tuina guidelines, emphasis should be placed on the reporting specifications of guidelines and the methodology of guideline development, including the rigor of the guideline development process, the clarity, application, and independence of reporting, to improve the quality and applicability of clinical practice guidelines, to guide and standardize the clinical practice of Tuina.


2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunice Y. Pyon

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.


1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen N. Lohr

Are clinical practice guidelines a means for improving the quality of health care? For saving money in the health care system? For solving the malpractice problem? For making the health care system work better for all? Or, are they a recipe for disaster? This overview sets out conceptual, definitional, and practical aspects of clinical practice guidelines as a broad framework for reflecting on the issue of what guidelines are and why they count. It draws mainly on work done since 1990 at the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and focuses on five questions. First, what are guidelines, and who develops them? Second, what criteria or principles should be used to create good guidelines? Third, what problems or pitfalls exist in developing and disseminating guidelines? Fourth, in what ways can guidelines help improve medical care, and in what ways will they not be as practical or useful, particularly with respect to quality of care? Finally, what ethical context might guide deliberations on this topic?


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040182
Author(s):  
Meng Zhang ◽  
Jun Tang ◽  
Yang He ◽  
Wenxing Li ◽  
Zhong Chen ◽  
...  

ObjectiveHyperbilirubinemia is one of the most common clinical symptoms in newborns. To improve patient outcomes, evidence-based and implementable guidelines are required. However, clinical guidelines may vary in quality, criteria and recommendations among regions and countries. In this study, we aimed to systematically assess the quality of guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE)-II instrument and summarise the specific recommendations for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia in order to provide suggestions for future guideline development.DesignSystematic review.InterventionsWe searched the PubMed, Embase, Medline and guideline databases for relevant articles on 10 April 2020. The studies were screened by two independent reviewers according to our inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted the descriptive data. Four appraisers assessed the guidelines using the AGREE-II instrument.ResultsOur systematic review appraised 12 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. The 12 guidelines achieved an average score of 36%–89%. The guidelines received the highest scores for clarity of presentation and lowest scores for rigour of development. Most recommendations for diagnosis were relatively consistent, but recommendations regarding risk factors, the initiating threshold of treatment and pharmacotherapy varied.ConclusionsOur study revealed that current guidelines vary in the quality of the developing process and are inconsistent with regards to recommendations. Future guidelines should afford more attention to the quality of methodologies in guideline development, and more qualified evidence is needed to standardise the initiating threshold of treatment for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.


Author(s):  
Zendy-Estefany Carmargo-Cardona ◽  
Andres Bernal-Ballen ◽  
Jose-Leonardo Cely-Andrade

Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are recommendations based on a systematic review of scientific evidence and generally these documents are under constant assess. For this matter, a group of health-professionals which belong to Fundación Centro Colombiano de Hipoterapia evaluated the use and quality of the used CPG using AGREE II instrument. The obtained results evidence correlation between both parameters since health-professionals trust in their acquired experience without detracting from the benefits that can be obtained with the use of guidelines. Among the mentioned benefits, improving the quality of care, effectiveness in clinical decisions, and the optimization of costs related to health care can be mentioned. Nonetheless, health-professionals reflect uncertainty in the recommendations generated by the guidelines because of the barriers presented such as strictness in its elaboration, it lacks in updates, audits and evaluations. Key words: Clinical practice guidelines, assessment, quality.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amal Hassanien

Abstract Rationale: This review has been conducted to facilitate evidence-informed policymaking and help healthcare policymakers in Saudi Arabia decide whether or not a sustainable investment in the CPG industry is socially and economically viable.Objectives: To investigate whether the clinical practice guidelines help to improve clinical practice and save costs.Methods: A literature review to evaluate the benefits of implementing clinical practice guidelines.Results: The clinical practice guidelines help improve clinical practice, but the evidence about their impact on saving costs is insufficient in the literature.Conclusion: Investing in CPGs industry seems socially and economically viable as there are many benefits health-care regulators, providers, and payers might gain. The unified national CPGs would enable health-care regulators to optimise the quality of care services, including by protecting patient safety and preventing malpractice, and to reduce the number of medical errors. While updating national unified clinical guidelines would represent a trustworthy peer-reviewed approach to health care and offer providers a reference for best practices in health care customised to the local context. Also, having a national reference for standardised medical practices would help healthcare payers improve value-based payments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document