Birrenbach Tanja, Kraehenmann Simone, Perrig Martin, Berendonk Christoph, Huwendiek Soeren
Department of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Assessment and Evaluation, Institute of Medical Education, Medical Faculty Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2016 Dec 13;7:673-680. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S115149. eCollection 2016.
Little is known about the attitudes toward, use of, and perceived barriers to clinical guidelines in Switzerland, a country with no national guideline agency. Moreover, there is no available data on the objective assessment of guideline knowledge in Switzerland. Therefore, we conducted a study at a large university's Department of General Internal Medicine in Switzerland to assess physicians' attitudes toward, use of, perceived barriers to, and knowledge of clinical guidelines.
Ninety-six physicians (residents, n=78, and attendings, n=18) were invited to take part in a survey. Attitudes toward, self-reported use of, and barriers hindering adherence to the clinical guidelines were assessed using established scales and frameworks. Knowledge of the guidelines was objectively tested in a written assessment comprising of 14 multiple-choice and 3 short answer case-based questions.
Fifty-five participants completed the survey (residents, n=42, and attendings, n=13; overall response rate 57%). Of these, 50 took part in the knowledge assessment (residents, n=37, and attendings, n=13; overall response rate 52%). Attitudes toward guidelines were favorable. They were considered to be a convenient source of advice (94% agreement), good educational tools (89% agreement), and likely to improve patient quality of care (91% agreement). Self-reported use of guidelines was limited, with only one-third reporting using guidelines often or very often. The main barriers to guideline adherence were identified as lack of guideline awareness and familiarity, applicability of existing guidelines to multimorbid patients, unfavorable guideline factors, and lack of time as well as inertia toward changing previous practice. In the assessment of guideline knowledge, the scores were rather modest (mean ± standard deviation: 60.5%±12.7% correct answers).
In general, this study found favorable physician attitudes toward clinical guidelines. However, several barriers hindering guideline implementation were identified. The importance of improving guideline implementation was supported by modest results in a guideline knowledge test.
在瑞士这个没有国家指南机构的国家,人们对临床指南的态度、使用情况以及感知到的障碍知之甚少。此外,瑞士尚无关于指南知识客观评估的可用数据。因此,我们在瑞士一所大型大学的普通内科进行了一项研究,以评估医生对临床指南的态度、使用情况、感知到的障碍以及知识水平。
邀请了96名医生(住院医师78名,主治医师18名)参与一项调查。使用既定的量表和框架评估对临床指南的态度、自我报告的使用情况以及阻碍遵循指南的障碍。通过一项书面评估对指南知识进行客观测试,该评估包括14道多项选择题和3道基于病例的简答题。
55名参与者完成了调查(住院医师42名,主治医师13名;总体回复率57%)。其中,50人参与了知识评估(住院医师37名,主治医师13名;总体回复率52%)。对指南的态度是积极的。它们被认为是方便的建议来源(94%表示认同)、良好的教育工具(89%表示认同),并且可能提高患者护理质量(91%表示认同)。自我报告的指南使用情况有限,只有三分之一的人报告经常或非常经常使用指南。指南遵循的主要障碍被确定为缺乏指南意识和熟悉度、现有指南对多病患者的适用性、不利的指南因素、缺乏时间以及改变既往做法的惰性。在指南知识评估中,得分相当一般(平均±标准差:正确答案为60.5%±12.7%)。
总体而言,本研究发现医生对临床指南的态度是积极的。然而,确定了阻碍指南实施的几个障碍。指南知识测试结果一般,这支持了改善指南实施的重要性。