Graham Tanya, Alderson Phil, Stokes Tim
King's College London, Department of Postgraduate Research, Florence Nightingale School of Nursing & Midwifery, 3.35 James Clerk Maxwell Building, 57 Waterloo Road, London SE1 8WA, United Kingdom.
Centre for Clinical Practice, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Level 1A, City Tower, Piccadilly Plaza, Manchester M1 4BT, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 26;10(3):e0122313. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122313. eCollection 2015.
There is international concern that conflicts of interest (COI) may bias clinical guideline development and render it untrustworthy. Guideline COI policies exist with the aim of reducing this bias but it is not known how such policies are interpreted and used by guideline producing organisations. This study sought to determine how conflicts of interest (COIs) are disclosed and managed by a national clinical guideline developer (NICE: the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence).
Qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews with 14 key informants: 8 senior staff of NICE's guideline development centres and 6 chairs of guideline development groups (GDGs). We conducted a thematic analysis.
Participants regard the NICE COI policy as comprehensive leading to transparent and independent guidance. The application of the NICE COI policy is, however, not straightforward and clarity could be improved. Disclosure of COI relies on self reporting and guideline developers have to take "on trust" the information they receive, certain types of COI (non-financial) are difficult to categorise and manage and disclosed COI can impact on the ability to recruit clinical experts to GDGs. Participants considered it both disruptive and stressful to exclude members from GDG meetings when required by the COI policy. Nonetheless the impact of this disruption can be minimised with good group chairing skills.
We consider that the successful implementation of a COI policy in clinical guideline development requires clear policies and procedures, appropriate training of GDG chairs and an evaluation of how the policy is used in practice.
国际上担心利益冲突可能会使临床指南的制定产生偏差并使其不可信。存在指南利益冲突政策,旨在减少这种偏差,但尚不清楚指南制定组织如何解释和使用这些政策。本研究旨在确定国家临床指南制定机构(英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所,NICE)如何披露和管理利益冲突。
采用定性研究方法,通过半结构化电话访谈14名关键信息提供者:NICE指南制定中心的8名高级工作人员和指南制定小组(GDG)的6名主席。我们进行了主题分析。
参与者认为NICE的利益冲突政策全面,可带来透明和独立的指南。然而,NICE利益冲突政策的应用并不简单,清晰度有待提高。利益冲突的披露依赖于自我报告,指南制定者必须“信任”他们收到的信息,某些类型的利益冲突(非财务)难以分类和管理,披露的利益冲突可能会影响向GDG招募临床专家的能力。参与者认为,根据利益冲突政策要求将成员排除在GDG会议之外既具有破坏性又会带来压力。尽管如此,通过良好的小组主持技巧,可以将这种干扰的影响降至最低。
我们认为,在临床指南制定中成功实施利益冲突政策需要明确的政策和程序、对GDG主席进行适当培训以及评估该政策在实践中的使用情况。