Adhering to evidence-based clinical practice guidelines results in lower readmission rates in Brazilian private hospitals

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Sebastian Naschold Geiger ◽  
André Miguel Japiassu ◽  
Hugo Tannus Mendonça Filho ◽  
Alexandre Maximiliano Rose ◽  
Daniel Coudry ◽  
...  

Background/Aims In clinical practice, an evidence-based approach is viewed as a pathway to creating a sustainable healthcare system. As such, many leaders in private hospitals still regard evidence-based approaches as tools to curtail length of stay. This article aimed to evaluate the impact of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the quality of care in Brazilian private hospitals. Methods The adherence to evidence-based clinical practice was compared to hospital readmission rates through a linear regression model. A machine learning clustering algorithm was applied to classify the hospitals according to these measures. Results The linear regression model showed a reverse correlation between adherence to evidence based clinical practice and readmission rates. The algorithm distributed the 83 hospitals into two groups, following the same pattern, with an additional finding suggesting an optimal hospital size for quality measures. Conclusions This article suggests that an evidence-based approach is associated with higher quality of care, by showing that hospitals following evidence-based guidelines have lower readmission rates than those who do not.

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


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Azizeh Khaled Sowan ◽  
Meghan Leibas ◽  
Albert Tarriela ◽  
Charles Reed

BACKGROUND The integration of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) into the nursing care plan and documentation systems aims to translate evidence into practice, improve safety and quality of care, and standardize care processes. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate nurses’ perceptions of the usability of a nursing care plan solution that includes 234 CPGs. METHODS A total of 100 nurses from 4 adult intensive care units (ICUs) responded to a survey measuring nurses’ perceptions of system usability. The survey included 37 rated items and 3 open-ended questions. RESULTS Nurses’ perceptions were favorable with more than 60.0% (60/100) in agreement on 12 features of the system and negative to moderate with 20.0% (20/100), to 59.0% (59/100) in agreement on 19 features. The majority of the nurses (80/100, 80.0% to 90/100, 90.0%) agreed on 4 missing safety features within the system. More than half of the nurses believed they would benefit from refresher classes on system use. Overall satisfaction with the system was just above average (54/100, 54.0%). Common positive themes from the narrative data were related to the system serving as a reminder for complete documentation and individualizing patient care. Common negative aspects were related to duplicate charting, difficulty locating CPGs, missing unit-specific CPGs, irrelevancy of information, and lack of perceived system value on patient outcomes. No relationship was found between years of system use or ICU experience and satisfaction with the system (P=.10 to P=.25). CONCLUSIONS Care plan systems in ICUs should be easy to navigate; support efficient documentation; present relevant, unit-specific, and easy-to-find information; endorse interdisciplinary communication; and improve safety and quality of care.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agustín Ciapponi ◽  
Tapia-López Elena ◽  
Virgilio Sacha ◽  
Ariel Bardach

Abstract Background Our aim was to summarize and compare relevant recommendations from evidence-based CPGs (EB-CPGs). Methods Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines. Data sources: PubMed, EMBase, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Tripdatabase and additional sources. In July 2017, we searched CPGs that were published in the last 10 years, without language restrictions, in electronic databases, and also searched specific CPG sources, reference lists and consulted experts. Pairs of independent reviewers selected EB-CPGs and rated their methodological quality using the AGREE-II instrument. We summarized recommendations, its supporting evidence and strength of recommendations according to the GRADE methodology. Results We included 16 EB-CPGs out of 2262 references identified. Only nine of them had searches within the last five years and seven used GRADE. The median (percentile 25-75) AGREE-II scores for rigor of development was 49% (35-76%) and the domain ‘applicability’ obtained the worst score: 16% (9-31%). We summarized 31 risk stratification recommendations, 21.6% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (41% of them were strong recommendations), and 16 therapeutic/preventive recommendations, 59% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (75.7% strong). We found inconsistency in ratings of evidence level. ‘Guidelines’ applicability’ and ‘monitoring’ were the most deficient domains. Only half of the EB-CPGs were updated in the past five years. Conclusions We present many strong recommendations that are ready to be considered for implementation as well as others to be interrupted, and we reveal opportunities to improve guidelines’ quality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document