Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME 04101, USA.
Med Care. 2011 Feb;49(2):139-48. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318202858e.
Multiple clinical practice guidelines exist for breast and cervical cancer screening, and differ in aggressiveness with respect to the recommended frequency and target populations for screening.
To determine (1) US primary care physicians' (PCPs) perceptions of the influence of different clinical practice guidelines; (2) the relationship between the number, aggressiveness, and agreement of influential guidelines and the aggressiveness of physicians' screening recommendations; and (3) factors associated with guideline perceptions.
A nationally representative sample of 1212 PCPs was surveyed in 2006-2007. Cross-sectional analyses examined physicians' perceptions of the influence of different breast and cervical cancer screening guidelines, the relationship of guideline perceptions to screening recommendations in response to hypothetical vignettes, and the predictors of guideline perceptions.
American Cancer Society and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines were perceived as more influential than other guidelines. Most physicians (62%) valued multiple guidelines, and conflicting and aggressive rather than conservative guideline combinations. The number, aggressiveness, and agreement of influential guidelines were associated with the aggressiveness of screening recommendations (P < 0.01)-which was highest for physicians valuing multiple-aggressive, lowest for physicians valuing multiple-conservative, and intermediate for physicians valuing multiple-conflicting, single, and no guidelines. Obstetrician/gynecologists specialty predicted valuation of aggressive guidelines (P < 0.001).
PCPs' perceptions of cancer screening guidelines vary, relate to screening recommendations in logically-consistent ways, and are predicted by specialty and other factors. The number, aggressiveness, and agreement of valued guidelines are associated with screening recommendations, suggesting that guideline multiplicity is an important problem in clinical decision-making.
有多个针对乳腺癌和宫颈癌筛查的临床实践指南,在推荐的筛查频率和目标人群方面存在差异。
确定(1)美国初级保健医生(PCP)对不同临床实践指南的影响的看法;(2)有影响力的指南数量、强度和一致性与医生筛查建议的强度之间的关系;以及(3)与指南看法相关的因素。
2006-2007 年对 1212 名 PCP 进行了一项全国代表性抽样调查。横断面分析检查了医生对不同乳腺癌和宫颈癌筛查指南的影响的看法、指南看法与对假设病例的筛查建议之间的关系,以及指南看法的预测因素。
美国癌症协会和美国妇产科医师学会的指南被认为比其他指南更有影响力。大多数医生(62%)重视多种指南,并且重视相互冲突和积极的而不是保守的指南组合。有影响力的指南的数量、强度和一致性与筛查建议的强度有关(P < 0.01)——对重视多种积极指南的医生的筛查建议最高,对重视多种保守指南的医生的筛查建议最低,对重视多种相互冲突、单一和无指南的医生的筛查建议中等。妇产科医生的专业知识预测了对积极指南的重视(P < 0.001)。
PCP 对癌症筛查指南的看法各不相同,与筛查建议以逻辑一致的方式相关,并且受到专业和其他因素的预测。重视的指南的数量、强度和一致性与筛查建议相关,这表明指南的多样性是临床决策中的一个重要问题。