Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, Centre for Child Health Research, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
BMC Pediatr. 2012 Jun 14;12:69. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-12-69.
Despite the availability of five guidelines for the diagnosis of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), there is no national endorsement for their use in diagnosis in Australia. In this study we aimed to describe health professionals' perceptions about the adoption of existing guidelines for the diagnosis of FASD in Australia and identify implications for the development of national guidelines.
We surveyed 130 Australian and 9 international health professionals with expertise or involvement in the screening or diagnosis of FASD. An online questionnaire was used to evaluate participants' familiarity with and use of five existing diagnostic guidelines for FASD, and to assess their perceptions about the adoption of these guidelines in Australia.
Of the 139 participants surveyed, 84 Australian and 8 international health professionals (66.2%) responded to the questions on existing diagnostic guidelines. Participants most frequently reported using the University of Washington 4-Digit Diagnostic Code (27.2%) and the Canadian guidelines (18.5%) for diagnosis. These two guidelines were also most frequently recommended for adoption in Australia: 32.5% of the 40 participants who were familiar with the University of Washington 4-Digit Diagnostic Code recommended adoption of this guideline in Australia, and 30.8% of the 26 participants who were familiar with the Canadian guidelines recommended adoption of this guideline in Australia. However, for the majority of guidelines examined, most participants were unsure whether they should be adopted in Australia. The adoption of existing guidelines in Australia was perceived to be limited by: their lack of evidence base, including the appropriateness of established reference standards for the Australian population; their complexity; the need for training and support to use the guidelines; and the lack of an interdisciplinary and interagency model to support service delivery in Australia.
Participants indicated some support for the adoption of the University of Washington or Canadian guidelines for FASD diagnosis; however, concerns were raised about the adoption of these diagnostic guidelines in their current form. Australian diagnostic guidelines will require evaluation to establish their validity in the Australian context, and a comprehensive implementation model is needed to facilitate improved diagnostic capacity in Australia.
尽管有五个用于诊断胎儿酒精谱系障碍(FASD)的指南,但澳大利亚尚未批准将其用于诊断。本研究旨在描述澳大利亚卫生专业人员对采用现有的 FASD 诊断指南的看法,并确定对制定国家指南的影响。
我们调查了 130 名澳大利亚和 9 名国际卫生专业人员,他们在 FASD 的筛查或诊断方面具有专业知识或参与。我们使用在线问卷评估参与者对五种现有的 FASD 诊断指南的熟悉程度和使用情况,并评估他们对在澳大利亚采用这些指南的看法。
在接受调查的 139 名参与者中,有 84 名澳大利亚和 8 名国际卫生专业人员(66.2%)回答了关于现有诊断指南的问题。参与者最常报告使用华盛顿大学 4 位数字诊断代码(27.2%)和加拿大指南(18.5%)进行诊断。这两个指南也最常被推荐在澳大利亚采用:熟悉华盛顿大学 4 位数字诊断代码的 40 名参与者中有 32.5%建议在澳大利亚采用该指南,熟悉加拿大指南的 26 名参与者中有 30.8%建议在澳大利亚采用该指南。然而,对于大多数检查的指南,大多数参与者不确定是否应在澳大利亚采用这些指南。在澳大利亚采用现有指南的可能性受到以下因素的限制:缺乏证据基础,包括适用于澳大利亚人群的既定参考标准;指南的复杂性;使用指南所需的培训和支持;以及缺乏跨学科和机构间的模式来支持澳大利亚的服务提供。
参与者表示支持采用华盛顿大学或加拿大的 FASD 诊断指南;然而,对这些诊断指南在现有形式下的采用表示担忧。澳大利亚的诊断指南需要进行评估,以确定其在澳大利亚背景下的有效性,并且需要一个全面的实施模式,以促进澳大利亚诊断能力的提高。