An audit of distribution and use of guidelines for management of head injury.
(17/8935)
Ensuring effective distribution of guidelines is an important step towards their implementation. To examine the effectiveness of dissemination of a guidelines card on management of head injury and determine its usefulness to senior house officers (SHOs), a questionnaire survey was performed in May 1990, after distribution of the cards in induction packs for new doctors and at postgraduate lectures and displaying the guidelines in accident and emergency departments and wards. A further survey, in March 1992, assessed the impact of modifying the distribution. All (175) SHOs working in general surgery, accident and emergency medicine, orthopaedics, and neurosciences on 1 February 1990 in 19 hospitals including two neurosurgical units in Northern region were sent self completion questionnaires about awareness, receipt, use, and perceived usefulness of the guidelines. 131 of 163(80%) SHOs in post responded (median response from hospitals 83% (range 50%-100%)). Over three quarters (103, 79%) of SHOs were aware of the guidelines and 82(63%) had ever possessed a guidelines card. Only 36(44%) acquired the card in the induction pack. 92%(98/107) found them useful and 81% (89/110) referred to them to some extent. Owning and carrying the card and referring to guidelines were associated with departmental encouragement to use the guidelines. Increasing the displays of guidelines in wards and departments and the supply of cards to consultants in accident and emergency medicine as a result of this survey did not increase the number of SHOs who received cards (52/83, 63%), but more (71/83, 86%) were aware of the guidelines. The guidelines were welcomed by SHOs and used in treating patients with head injury, but their distribution requires improvement. Increased use of the guidelines may be achieved by introducing other distribution methods and as a result of encouragement by senior staff. (+info)
Problems with implementing guidelines: a randomised controlled trial of consensus management of dyspepsia.
(18/8935)
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and benefit of developing guidelines for managing dyspepsia by consensus between general practitioners (GPs) and specialists and to evaluate their introduction on GPs' prescribing, use of investigations, and referrals. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial of effect of consensus guidelines agreed between GPs and specialists on GPs' behaviour. SETTING: Southampton and South West Hampshire Health District, United Kingdom. SUBJECTS: 179 GPs working in 45 practices in Southampton district out of 254 eligible GPs, 107 in the control group and 78 in the study group. MAIN MEASURES: Rates of referral and investigation and costs of prescribing for dyspepsia in the six months before and after introduction of the guidelines. RESULTS: Consensus guidelines were produced relatively easily. After their introduction referral rates for upper gastrointestinal symptoms fell significantly in both study and control groups, but no significant change occurred in either group in the use of endoscopy or radiology, either in terms of referral rates, patient selection, or findings on investigation. No difference was observed between the control and study group in the number of items prescribed, but prescribing costs rose by 25% (from 2634 pounds to 3215 pounds per GP) in the study group, almost entirely due to an increased rate of prescription of ulcer-healing agents. CONCLUSION: Developing district guidelines for managing dyspepsia by consensus between GPs and specialists was feasible. However, their acceptance and adoption was variable and their measured effects on some aspects of clinical behaviour were relatively weak and not necessarily associated with either decreased costs or improved quality of care. (+info)
Clinical guidelines: proliferation and medicolegal significance.
(19/8935)
Guidelines seeking to influence and regulate clinical activity are currently gaining a new cultural ascendancy on both sides of the Atlantic. Statutory agencies may be charged with developing clinical guidelines, and civil courts, in deciding actions in negligence, could be influenced by standards of care expressed in guideline statements. Clinical guidelines are not accorded unchallengeable status: they have been subject to careful scrutiny by British and American courts to establish their authenticity and relevance. In the United States, compliance with clinical guidelines cannot be used as a defence against liability if a physician's conduct is held to have been negligent, and third party organisations can be held liable if their clinical guidelines are found to be a contributory cause of patient harm. Guidelines have not usurped the role of the expert witness in court. The importance the law attaches to customary practice means that atypical or bizarre guidelines are unlikely to be accepted as embodying a legally required standard of clinical care. (+info)
Management of coeliac disease: a changing diagnostic approach but what value in follow up?
(20/8935)
OBJECTIVE: To assess the management of patients with coeliac disease in relation to a change in diagnostic method from jejunal suction biopsy to endoscopic biopsy. DESIGN: 16 item questionnaire survey of consultant members of the British Society of Gastroenterology. SUBJECTS: 359 consultant physician and gastroenterologist members of the society. MAIN MEASURES: Type of routine biopsy; repeat biopsy after gluten withdrawal; gluten rechallenge; follow up measurements; screening for malignancy; and methods of follow up, including special clinics. RESULTS: 270(70%) members replied; 216(80%) diagnosed coeliac disease routinely by endoscopic duodenal biopsy, 30(11%) by jejunal capsule biopsy, and the remainder by either method. Only 156(58%) repeated the biopsy after gluten withdrawal, though more did so for duodenal than jejunal biopsies (134/216, 62% v 13/30, 43%; p < 0.02). Follow up biopsies featured more duodenal than jejunal biopsies (133/156, 82% v 23/156, 15%; p < 0.02). Regular follow up included assessments of weight (259, 96%) and full blood count (238, 88%) but limited assessment of serum B-12 and folate (120, 44%) and calcium (105, 39%) concentrations. Routine screening for malignancy is not performed, and there are few specialist clinics. 171(63%) respondents thought that patients should be followed up by a hospital specialist and 58(21%) by family doctors. CONCLUSIONS: The practice of diagnosing coeliac disease varies appreciably from that in many standard texts. Many patients could be effectively cared for by their family doctor. IMPLICATIONS: The British Society of Gastroenterology should support such management by family doctors by providing clear guidelines for them. (+info)
Development of clinical guidelines in a health district: an attempt to find consensus.
(21/8935)
OBJECTIVE: To formulate consensus based guidelines for antenatal care in a health district. DESIGN: Prospective formulation of draft guidelines by a working group of consultant obstetricians and general practitioners with an obstetric interest, canvassing opinions of all GPs in the district by questionnaire, and revision and final circulation of the guidelines. SETTING: One health district. SUBJECTS: All 160 GPs in the district and members of the working party. MAIN MEASURES: Questionnaire responses to specific proposals within the draft guidelines for managing anaemia, antepartum haemorrhage, and hypertension. RESULTS: 136 GPs responded (response rate 85%); responders and nonresponders did not differ in age, sex, or presence on obstetric list. Overall they favoured more conservative management than suggested in the guidelines. For example, only 38% (44/116) prescribed iron routinely and 34% (38/113) referred to hospital for haemoglobin concentration of < or = 10 g/l; 10% referred women unnecessarily for oedema unassociated with proteinuria; and 20% managed active bleeding progressing to old brown staining as an urgent admission. The guidelines were revised according to the relative weight of the views obtained. CONCLUSION: Establishing guidelines is mainly a political process. Canvassed views influenced guidelines most when internal disagreement existed within the working party. IMPLICATIONS AND ACTION: Regular revising of the guidelines is planned, which, in conjunction with repeating the questionnaire to monitor changing practice, will allow a long term district wide clinical review. (+info)
Effect of guidelines on management of head injury on record keeping and decision making in accident and emergency departments.
(22/8935)
OBJECTIVE: To compare record keeping and decision making in accident and emergency departments before and after distribution of guidelines on head injury management as indices of implementation. DESIGN: Before (1987) and after (1990) study of accident and emergency medical records. SETTING: Two accident and emergency departments in England. PATIENTS: 1144 adult patients with head injury in department 1 (533 in 1987, 613 in 1990) and 734 in department 2 (370, 364 respectively). MAIN MEASURES: Recording of relevant symptoms and signs as determined in the guidelines; presence of, indications for, and rates and appropriateness of skull x ray examination and admission. RESULTS: The median number of guidelines variables recorded for all study periods ranged from 7 to 9 out of a possible maximum of 27. For key decision making variables the presence or absence of penetrating injury was least likely to be recorded (< or = 1%) and that of loss of consciousness most likely (> or = 75%). Altogether, the proportion of patients receiving skull x ray examination or admitted varied from 25%-60% and 7%-23% respectively; overall, 69% (1280/1856) and 64% (1177/1851) of patients were managed appropriately. However, no consistent change occurred in the departments between the study periods. For instance, in department 1 the proportion of appropriate x ray examinations rose significantly after distribution of the guidelines (from 61% (202/330) to 73% (305/417)) and appropriate decisions on whether to x ray or not also rose (from 65% (340/522) to 72% (435/608)). There was no significant change in department 2, although the proportion of appropriate admissions fell (from 33% (55/166) to 15% (19/130)). CONCLUSIONS: Recording practice and decision making were variable and had not consistently improved after dissemination of the guidelines. Strategies are required to ensure effective implementation of guidelines. (+info)
National audit of acute severe asthma in adults admitted to hospital. Standards of Care Committee, British Thoracic Society.
(23/8935)
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the standard of care for hospital management of acute severe asthma in adults. DESIGN: Questionnaire based retrospective multicentre survey of case records. SETTING: 36 hospitals (12 teaching and 24 district general hospitals) across England, Wales, and Scotland. PATIENTS: All patients admitted with acute severe asthma between 1 August and 30 September 1990 immediately before publication of national guidelines for asthma management. MAIN MEASURES: Main recommendations of guidelines for hospital management of acute severe asthma as performed by respiratory and non-respiratory physicians. RESULTS: 766 patients (median age 41 (range 16-94) years) were studied; 465 (63%) were female and 448 (61%) had had previous admissions for asthma. Deficiencies were evident for each aspect of care studied, and respiratory physicians performed better than non-respiratory physicians. 429 (56%) patients had had their treatment increased in the two weeks preceding the admission but only 237 (31%) were prescribed oral steroids. Initially 661/766 (86%) patients had peak expiratory flow measured and recorded but only 534 (70%) ever had arterial blood gas tensions assessed. 65 (8%) patients received no steroid treatment in the first 24 hours after admission. Variability of peak expiratory flow was measured before discharge in 597/759 (78%) patients, of whom 334 (56%) achieved good control (variability < 25%). 47 (6%) patients were discharged without oral or inhaled steroids; 182/743 (24%) had no planned outpatient follow up and 114 failed to attend, leaving 447 (60%) seen in clinic within two months. Only 57/629 (8%) patients were recorded as having a written management plan. CONCLUSIONS: The hospital management of a significant minority of patients deviates from recommended national standards and some deviations are potentially serious. Overall, respiratory physicians provide significantly better care than non-respiratory physicians. (+info)
Implementing a policy for pneumococcal prophylaxis in a haematology unit after splenectomy.
(24/8935)
People who have had a splenectomy for any reason are 40 times more likely to have an overwhelming infection, especially pneumococcal infection, and 17 times more likely to suffer fatal sepsis. The incidence of such life threatening infections is reduced by prophylactic immunisation with polyvalent pneumococcal vaccine and long term antibiotic prophylaxis or instituting prompt antibiotic treatment in the event of fever. This haematology unit agreed a policy of immunisation and antibiotic prophylaxis in June 1988 for all patients undergoing elective splenectomy. The success of this policy was audited in July 1993 by a retrospective analysis of patients' case notes. Seventy four patients were identified as having had a splenectomy, 54 (73%) before June 1988, of whom only 13 (24%) had received both pneumococcal immunisation and antibiotic prophylaxis before implementation of the agreed policy. At the time of audit, 46/74 (62%) patients were recorded as having received immunisation and 64/74 (86%) as receiving antibiotic prophylaxis or a supply of antibiotics to take in the event of a fever. All but one of the 20 patients who had a splenectomy after June 1988, since implementation of the agreed policy, received immunisation and antibiotic prophylaxis. The authors conclude that establishment of a formal agreed policy for pneumococcal prophylaxis for patients undergoing splenectomy has improved the quality of care. (+info)