Carter A O, Battista R N, Hodge M J, Lewis S, Basinski A, Davis D
Department of Health Care and Promotion, CMA, Ottawa, Ont.
CMAJ. 1995 Oct 1;153(7):901-7.
The organizing committee of a workshop on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) surveyed invited organizations on their attitudes and activities related to five topics to be covered during the workshop sessions: organizational roles, priority setting, guidelines implementation, guidelines evaluation and development of a network of those active in the CPG field. Organizational roles: The national specialty societies were felt to have the largest role to play; the smallest roles were assigned to consumers, who were seen to have a role mainly in priority setting, and to industry and government, both of which were seen to have primarily a funding role. Many barriers to collaboration were identified, the solutions to all of which appeared to be better communication, establishment of common principles and clear role definitions. Priority setting: There was considerable agreement on the criteria that should be used to set priorities for CPG activities: the burden of disease on population health, the state of scientific knowledge, the cost of treatment and the economic burden of disease on society were seen as important factors, whereas the costs of guidelines development and practitioner interest in guidelines development were seen as less important. Organizations were unable to give much information on how they set priorities. Guidelines implementation: Most of the organizations surveyed did not actively try to ensure the implementation of guidelines, although a considerable minority devoted resources to implementation. The 38% of organizations that implemented guidelines actively listed a wide variety of activities, including training, use of local opinion leaders, information technology, local consensus processes and counter detailing. Guidelines evaluation: Formal evaluation of guidelines was undertaken by fewer than 13% of the responding organizations. All the evaluations incorporated assessments before and after guideline implementation, and some used primary patient data. Barriers to evaluation included lack of money, time, data or expertise. CPG Network: Most of the respondents felt that all organizations and individuals interested or involved in guidelines should form the membership of the network. The three most important functions of such a network were deemed to be (a) to facilitate collaboration among those involved in the CPG process, (b) to maintain an information centre on CPGs and (c) to provide expertise to the CPG process. It was felt that the network should have some formal structure and communicate through e-mail and print media.
一个临床实践指南(CPG)研讨会的组织委员会就与研讨会期间要涵盖的五个主题相关的态度和活动,对受邀组织进行了调查。这五个主题分别是:组织角色、优先级设定、指南实施、指南评估以及建立CPG领域活跃人士网络。组织角色:国家专业协会被认为发挥的作用最大;消费者被认为发挥的作用最小,他们主要在优先级设定方面发挥作用;行业和政府的作用也较小,二者主要被视为具有资金资助作用。人们发现了许多合作障碍,而所有这些障碍的解决办法似乎都是加强沟通、确立共同原则以及明确角色定义。优先级设定:对于应采用哪些标准来为CPG活动设定优先级,人们达成了相当多的共识:疾病对人群健康的负担、科学知识状况、治疗成本以及疾病对社会的经济负担被视为重要因素,而指南制定成本和从业者对指南制定的兴趣则被视为不太重要。各组织无法提供太多有关其如何设定优先级的信息。指南实施:大多数接受调查的组织并未积极努力确保指南的实施,不过有相当少数的组织投入资源进行实施。积极实施指南的38%的组织列出了各种各样的活动,包括培训、利用当地意见领袖、信息技术、地方共识程序以及反向详细说明。指南评估:不到13%的回应组织对指南进行了正式评估。所有评估都纳入了指南实施前后的评估,有些还使用了原始患者数据。评估的障碍包括资金、时间、数据或专业知识的缺乏。CPG网络:大多数受访者认为,所有对指南感兴趣或参与指南工作的组织和个人都应成为该网络的成员。这样一个网络的三个最重要功能被认为是:(a)促进参与CPG过程的各方之间的合作;(b)维持一个关于CPG的信息中心;(c)为CPG过程提供专业知识。人们认为该网络应具有某种正式结构,并通过电子邮件和印刷媒体进行沟通。