Costantini O, Papp K K, Como J, Aucott J, Carlson M D, Aron D C
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Acad Med. 1999 Oct;74(10):1138-43. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199910000-00019.
To examine attitudes of faculty, housestaff, and medical students toward clinical practice guidelines.
In a 1997 cross-sectional survey, a two-part, 26-item, self-administered questionnaire was mailed to all faculty, housestaff, and medical students in the department of internal medicine at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. The questionnaire asked for demographic information and attitudes toward clinical guidelines.
Of 379 persons surveyed, 254 (67%) returned usable questionnaires: 56% of the medical students, 70% of the housestaff, and 73% of the full-time faculty. Medical students reported learning about guidelines predominantly during clerkships in internal medicine (71%) and pediatrics (68%). Overall, the respondents agreed most strongly that guidelines are "useful for the care of common problems," and least strongly that guidelines are "difficult to apply to individual patients" and "reduce physician options in patient care." Faculty were more likely to consider guidelines a "good educational tool" and less likely than were medical students and housestaff to agree that they promote "cookbook medicine." Of 11 influences on clinical decision making, the three groups together rated practice guidelines eighth or ninth. The use of guidelines for academic investigations was rated most appropriate, overall. In terms of their appropriateness, faculty consistently rated the use of guidelines more favorably except for use in malpractice suits.
Faculty, housestaff, and medical students have significantly different perceptions of and attitudes toward clinical practice guidelines. Further studies are needed to explain the reasons for these differences. Considerable education and involvement must occur at all levels for practice guidelines to be successfully implemented and understood.
研究教员、住院医师和医学生对临床实践指南的态度。
在1997年的一项横断面调查中,一份分为两部分、共26项的自填式问卷被邮寄给凯斯西储大学医学院内科所有教员、住院医师和医学生。问卷询问了人口统计学信息以及对临床指南的态度。
在379名被调查者中,254人(67%)返回了可用问卷:医学生的回复率为56%,住院医师为70%,全职教员为73%。医学生报告称主要在内科实习(71%)和儿科实习(68%)期间了解到指南。总体而言,受访者最强烈认同指南“对常见问题的护理有用”,而最不认同指南“难以应用于个体患者”和“减少医生在患者护理中的选择”。教员更倾向于将指南视为“良好的教育工具”,并且与医学生和住院医师相比,不太可能认同指南会促成“照本宣科式医疗”。在对临床决策的11种影响因素中,这三组人员共同将实践指南排在第八或第九位。总体而言,将指南用于学术研究被认为是最恰当的。在恰当性方面,除了在医疗事故诉讼中的应用外,教员对指南应用的评价一直更为积极。
教员、住院医师和医学生对临床实践指南的认知和态度存在显著差异。需要进一步研究来解释这些差异的原因。为了使实践指南得以成功实施和理解,必须在各个层面进行大量的教育和参与。