Search

Abstract Background Antihypertensive drug choices and treatment levels are not in accordance with the existing guidelines. We aimed to assess the impact of a guideline implementation intervention on antihypertensive drug prescribing. Methods In this controlled before and after study, the effects of a multifaceted (education, audit and feedback, local care pathway) quality programme was evaluated. The intervention was carried out in a health centre between 2002 and 2003. From each health care unit (n = 31), a doctor-nurse pair was trained to act as peer facilitators in the intervention. All antihypertensive drugs prescribed by 25 facilitator general practitioners (intervention GPs) and 53 control GPs were retrieved from the nationwide Prescription Register for three-month periods in 2001 and 2003. The proportions of patients receiving specific antihypertensive drugs and multiple antihypertensive drugs were measured before and after the intervention for three subgroups of hypertension patients: hypertension only, with coronary heart disease, and with diabetes. Results In all subgroups, the use of multiple concurrent medications increased. For intervention patients with hypertension only, the odds ratio (OR) was 1.12 (95% CI 0.99, 1.25; p = 0.06) and for controls 1.13 (1.05, 1.21; p = 0.002). We observed no statistically significant differences in the change in the prescribing of specific antihypertensive agents between the intervention and control groups. The use of agents acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system increased in all subgroups (hypertension only intervention patients OR 1.19 (1.06, 1.34; p = 0.004) and controls OR 1.24 (1.15, 1.34; p < 0.0001). Conclusions A multifaceted guideline implementation intervention does not necessarily lead to significant changes in prescribing performance. Rigorous planning of the interventions and quality projects and their evaluation are essential.

Background: The Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) aims to promote high quality clinical guideline development and implementation. Guideline-based performance measures are a key implementation tool and are widely used internationally for quality improvement, quality assurance, and pay for performance in health care. There is, however, no international consensus on best methods for guideline-based performance measures. In order to address this issue, the G-I-N Performance Measures Working Group aimed to develop a set of consensus-based reporting standards for guideline-based performance measure development and re-evaluation.Methods: Methodology publications on guideline-based performance measures were identified from a systematic literature review and analyzed. Core criteria for the development and evaluation process of guideline-based performance measures were determined and refined into draft standards with an associated rationale and description of the evidence base. In a two-round Delphi-process, the group members appraised and approved the draft standards. After the first round, the group met to discuss comments and revised the drafts accordingly.Results: Twenty-one methodology publications were reviewed. The group reached strong consensus on nine reporting standards concerning: (1) selection of clinical guidelines, (2) extraction of clinical guideline recommendations, (3) description of the measure development process, (4) measure appraisal, (5) measure specification, (6) description of the intended use of the measure, (7) measure testing/validating, (8) measure review/re-evaluation, and (9) composition of the measure development panel.Conclusions: These proposed international reporting standards address core components of guideline-based performance measure development and re-evaluation. They are intended to contribute to international reporting harmonization and improvement of methods for performance measures. Further research is required regarding validity, acceptability, and practicality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implementation research examines and promotes the uptake of research findings in various operational environments. The concepts of implementation research in Finnish are not yet established. In support of the research field we describe the Finnish equivalents of the central terms related to knowledge translation in healthcare and the frame of reference of Implementation research, with the national Current Care Guidelines as the starting point. The frame of reference is based on literature, experiences of the authors, iterative modification of the frame of reference on the basis of discussions, and results of expert inquiry. The frame of reference describes seven objects of evaluation, examples of research set-ups and methods as well as tools.

This guideline, targeted to healthcare workers dealing with food-allergic children, provides a review on the clinical aspects of pediatric food allergy. The main updates include: elimination diets are not recommended for breast-feeding mothers; probiotics are not recommended for allergy prevention or treatment; food challenges are the basis of the diagnosis, but it can be improved by IgE component diagnostics. The treatment for severe symptoms is specific food avoidance, mildly symptomatic children should continue with versatile diet. Specific oral tolerance induction is a safe and effective treatment in most of the pediatric patients.

Treatment recommendations provide clinicians with evaluated and compiled information about effective treatment practices. The recommendations do not, however, automatically translate into treatment practices. Individual methods of application of treatment recommendations have at the most a moderate effect on the methods of operation of professionals. The effect may be stronger, if the obstacles to the realization of a treatment recommendation are recognized and the methods selected accordingly, observing the local conditions. The application of treatment recommendations should be bundled with the long-term development of the organization, whereby structures supporting the development work are formed within the organization.

Most benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients can be diagnosed and treated in primary care. Evaluation requires a medical history and a symptom score (DAN-PSS or IPSS) and a careful physical examination including a digital rectal examination. Careful follow-up and medical therapy are the usual first-line management options in uncomplicated BPH. Combination therapy with both alpha-blocker and 5alpha-reductase inhibitor is the most effective medical treatment modality. Transurethral resection (TURP) is a safe and effective way of treating BPH. The green laser is the most promising new endoscopic treatment modality.