Navigation Links
IOM recommends standards to achieve reliable clinical practice guidelines
Date:3/23/2011

WASHINGTON Clinical practice guidelines and systematic reviews of the evidence base for health care services are supposed to offer health care providers, patients, and organizations authoritative guidance on the comparable pros and cons of various care options, but too often they are of uncertain or poor quality. There are no universally accepted standards for developing systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines, leading to variability in the handling of conflicts of interest, appraisals of evidence, and the rigor of the evaluations. Two new reports from the Institute of Medicine recommend standards to enhance the quality and reliability of these important tools for informing health care decisions (see illustration).

Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust recommends eight standards to ensure the objective, transparent development of trustworthy guidelines. Several problems hinder providers' and others' ability to determine which among thousands of sometimes competing guidelines offer reliable clinical recommendations. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews recommends 21 standards to ensure objective, transparent, and scientifically valid reviews. Poor quality reviews can lead clinicians to the wrong conclusions and ultimately to inappropriate treatment decisions.

"These standards are necessary given that there is little documentation to judge the quality and reliability of many of the existing clinical practice guidelines," said Sheldon Greenfield, Donald Bren Professor of Medicine and executive director, Health Policy Research Institute, University of California, Irvine, and chair of the committee on guidelines. "Practice guidelines provide valuable data and guidance that not only inform individual decisions about care but ultimately could also improve overall health care quality and outcomes."

"This report presents the 'gold standard' to which those who conduct systematic reviews should aspire to achieve the most reliable and useful products," said Alfred O. Berg, professor of family medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, and chair of the committee that wrote the report on systematic reviews. "We recognize that it will take an investment of resources and time to achieve such high standards, but they should be adopted to minimize the chances that important health decisions are based on information that may be biased or erroneous."

To prevent actual or perceived conflicts of interest from eroding trust in clinical practice guidelines, members of guideline development groups should not have intellectual, institutional, financial, or other forms of conflicts whenever possible, says the guidelines report. However, if a group cannot perform its work without conflicted individuals, they should make up only a minority of the members. Those who fund guideline development work should have no role in the development process. Similarly, individuals with clear financial conflicts of interest as well as those with professional or intellectual biases that would lessen an evaluation's credibility should be excluded from the teams that conduct systematic reviews, the report on reviews says.

Getting input from consumers, health professionals, insurers, and other intended users can boost the quality of reviews and guidelines and make them more relevant. Guideline development groups should include a current or former patient and a patient advocate or representative of a consumer organization. Systematic reviews should include a method to collect information from individuals with relevant perspectives and expertise. Individuals providing input should publicly acknowledge their potential biases and conflicts and be excluded from the process if their participation would diminish the evaluation's credibility.

People expect clinical practice guidelines to provide an accurate, fair account of the potential benefits and harms of various health care options and they expect systematic reviews to provide a complete picture of all that is known about an intervention. Because guideline developers often have to make subjective judgments about evidence, especially when it is low-quality or limited, they should explicitly describe the part that value judgments, theory, or clinical experience played in their recommendations, the guidelines report says. They should explain the reasoning underlying each recommendation they make, including their assessment of the quality, completeness, and consistency of the available evidence. Teams conducting systematic reviews should not limit their evaluations to the published literature or large databases because negative findings sometimes go unpublished and these tools provide only a partial picture of the evidence, the report on reviews says. Reviewers should seek out relevant unpublished information. And they should clearly describe the team's methodology, selection criteria, and assessment of the evidence, including what remains unknown about the topic.


'/>"/>

Contact: Christine Stencel
news@nas.edu
202-334-2138
National Academy of Sciences
Source:Eurekalert

Related medicine news :

1. FDA Panel Recommends Testing of Electroshock Devices
2. FDA Panel Recommends Tougher Standards for External Defibrillators
3. New guideline from ASH and ASCO recommends caution regarding ESA use in cancer patients
4. ASH recommends cross-disciplinary engagement to advance regenerative medicine
5. New global report launched by the International AIDS Society recommends a new paradigm for treating injecting drug users: Seek, test, treat and retain
6. Panel recommends standardizing prescription container labeling
7. JustGetTested.com Recommends Confidential Blood Testing During Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Awareness Month (April)
8. New York Medical Malpractice Attorney Recommends Cancer Patients Take Precautionary Steps Before Undergoing Radiation Therapy
9. Maher Law Firm Warns Avandia Users - NY Times Reports - FDA Recommends Recall of Avandia
10. Quality standards for widely used medicines strengthened
11. Community oncology: Ensuring the best standards of care
Post Your Comments:
*Name:
*Comment:
*Email:
(Date:6/27/2016)... , ... June 27, 2016 , ... "FCPX editors can ... inside of Final Cut Pro X," said Christina Austin - CEO of Pixel Film ... Final Cut Pro X users can now reveal the media of their ...
(Date:6/26/2016)... ... ... Quality metrics are proliferating in cancer care, and are derived from many ... the beholder, according to experts who offered insights and commentary in the current issue ... the full issue, click here . , For the American Society of Clinical ...
(Date:6/26/2016)... (PRWEB) , ... June 26, 2016 , ... ... fertility once they have been diagnosed with endometriosis. These women need a treatment ... also require a comprehensive approach that can help for preservation of fertility and ...
(Date:6/25/2016)... , ... June 25, 2016 , ... First Choice ... States, named Dr. Sesan Ogunleye, as the Medical Director of its new Mesquite-Samuell Farm ... Medical Director of our new Mesquite location,” said Dr. James M. Muzzarelli, Executive Medical ...
(Date:6/24/2016)... ... 2016 , ... A recent article published June 14 on E ... goes on to state that individuals are now more comfortable seeking to undergo not ... as calf and cheek reduction. The Los Angeles area medical group, Beverly Hills Physicians ...
Breaking Medicine News(10 mins):
(Date:6/24/2016)... , June 24, 2016  Arkis BioSciences, ... less invasive and more durable cerebrospinal fluid treatments, ... funding.  The Series-A funding is led by Innova ... Fund, and other private investors.  Arkis, new financing ... instrumentation and the market release of its in-licensed ...
(Date:6/23/2016)... , June 23, 2016  In a startling report released today, ... their residents by lacking a comprehensive, proven plan to eliminate prescription ... definitive ranking of how states are tackling the worst drug crisis ... four states – Kentucky , New ... Vermont . Of the 28 failing states, three – ...
(Date:6/23/2016)... Bracket , a leading clinical trial technology and specialty ... Bracket eCOA (SM) 6.0, at the 52 nd ... in Philadelphia , Pennsylvania.  A demonstration of ... its kind to fully integrate with RTSM, will be held ... a flexible platform for electronic clinical outcomes assessments that is ...
Breaking Medicine Technology: