Brook R H, Kamberg C J
Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1993 Feb 20;123(7):249-53.
Resources available to provide adequate health care in western countries must compete with other priorities such as education and the environment. At the same time the allocation of health resources often does not correspond to the real needs of patients. We have developed a method that combines what is known in the literature with expert physician judgment to generate clinically valid appropriateness guidelines. The method involves a modified Delphi approach, including a detailed literature review, consultations with experts, and three rounds of panel ratings. Clinical scenarios, or indications, are rated appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate. Appropriate means that the procedure is worth doing for the given indication if the health benefit exceeds the health risk. We have conducted panels relating to coronary procedures in four countries. Application of the indications to individual cases has demonstrated that the amount of inappropriate care is too large to be ignored. Dissemination of appropriateness results might take the form of public disclosure or as part of the physician/patient exchange to improve performance. Indications for which a procedure is frequently performed and which are rated uncertain should be considered to be the focus of controlled clinical trials.
西方国家用于提供充足医疗保健的资源必须与其他优先事项竞争,如教育和环境。与此同时,卫生资源的分配往往与患者的实际需求不符。我们开发了一种方法,将文献中已知的内容与专家医生的判断相结合,以生成具有临床有效性的适宜性指南。该方法涉及一种改进的德尔菲法,包括详细的文献综述、与专家的咨询以及三轮专家小组评分。临床情景或适应症被评为适宜、不确定或不适宜。适宜意味着如果健康益处超过健康风险,对于给定的适应症,该程序值得进行。我们在四个国家开展了与冠状动脉手术相关的专家小组工作。将这些适应症应用于个别病例表明,不适当治疗的数量大到不容忽视。适宜性结果的传播可以采取公开披露的形式,或作为医生/患者交流的一部分,以提高医疗质量。对于经常进行且被评为不确定的手术适应症,应被视为对照临床试验的重点。