A normative analytic framework for development of practice guidelines for specific clinical populations.

BACKGROUND

A central problem in practice guideline development is how to develop guidelines that appropriately account for variations in clinical populations and practice settings. Despite recognition of this problem, there is no formal mechanism for assessing what the need is for flexibility in guidelines, or for deciding how to incorporate such flexibility into recommendations.

OBJECTIVE

This research sought to provide a formal basis to determine when clinical circumstances vary sufficiently that guideline recommendations should differ, how recommendations should be tailored for a specific clinical setting, and whether the benefit associated with such site-specific guidelines justifies the expense of their development.

RESULTS

The authors describe an approach for estimating the maximum health benefit that developers can obtain by eliminating uncertainty about differences in the patient populations and practice settings in which a guideline will be used. This estimate, the expected value of customization, provides a mechanism to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the development of site-specific guidelines that account explicitly for variation in clinical circumstances. Application of this method to the development of screening guidelines for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection indicates that the development of site-specific guidelines potentially is cost-effective. Site-specific guidelines either improve, or leave unchanged, the efficiency of HIV screening; whether they increase or decrease total expenditures and health benefits depends on the choice of a cost-effectiveness threshold, and the clinical problem.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of guideline recommendations based on decision models provides a normative approach for evaluating the need for and the cost-effectiveness of site-specific guidelines that have been tailored to specific practice settings. Such site-specific guidelines can improve substantially the expected health benefit and the economic efficiency of practice guidelines.