Adherence of gastroenterologists to European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation consensus on Crohn's disease: a real-life survey in Spain.
ABSTRACT There is no information as to the extent by which Spanish gastroenterologists adhere to Crohn's disease (CD) management guidelines. The objective of this study was to evaluate the degree of adherence of Spanish gastroenterologists to the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO) guidelines and to determine whether differences in adherence exist between gastroenterologists specialized in inflammatory bowel diseases (GSIBDs) and general gastroenterologists (GGs).
This was a prospective, nation-wide, questionnaire-based survey covering aspects related to diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, and safety considered by the physicians in their daily management of CD, as well as demographic traits seen in clinical practice.
The overall degree of adherence to guidelines by both GSIBDs and GGs was high. However, the use of imaging techniques in diagnosis, follow-up, and in relapsed patients differed between the two groups. In the diagnosis of perianal disease, GSIBDs used magnetic resonance and surgical exploration under anesthesia more frequently than GGs. In terms of therapeutic choices, the adherence to guidelines was good in both groups. However, GSIBDs showed significantly higher adherence in some areas: thiopurines were used less in refractory cases and methotrexate was used more commonly in corticoid-dependent, azathioprine-intolerant patients, and in patients under biological treatment. Request for infection studies and vaccinations at diagnosis or prior to treatment was more common among GSIBDs.
Guideline adherence among Spanish gastroenterologists is high. However, there are significant differences between IBD-specialized (more adherent in general) and non-specialized gastroenterologists.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although interest in clinical guidelines has never been greater, uncertainty persists about whether they are effective. The debate has been hampered by the lack of a rigorous overview. We have identified 59 published evaluations of clinical guidelines that met defined criteria for scientific rigour; 24 investigated guidelines for specific clinical conditions, 27 studied preventive care, and 8 looked at guidelines for prescribing or for support services. All but 4 of these studies detected significant improvements in the process of care after the introduction of guidelines and all but 2 of the 11 studies that assessed the outcome of care reported significant improvements. We conclude that explicit guidelines do improve clinical practice, when introduced in the context of rigorous evaluations. However, the size of the improvements in performance varied considerably.The Lancet 12/1993; 342(8883):1317-22. · 39.06 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Despite wide promulgation, clinical practice guidelines have had limited effect on changing physician behavior. Little is known about the process and factors involved in changing physician practices in response to guidelines. To review barriers to physician adherence to clinical practice guidelines. We searched the MEDLINE, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), and HealthSTAR databases (January 1966 to January 1998); bibliographies; textbooks on health behavior or public health; and references supplied by experts to find English-language article titles that describe barriers to guideline adherence. Of 5658 articles initially identified, we selected 76 published studies describing at least 1 barrier to adherence to clinical practice guidelines, practice parameters, clinical policies, or national consensus statements. One investigator screened titles to identify candidate articles, then 2 investigators independently reviewed the texts to exclude articles that did not match the criteria. Differences were resolved by consensus with a third investigator. Two investigators organized barriers to adherence into a framework according to their effect on physician knowledge, attitudes, or behavior. This organization was validated by 3 additional investigators. The 76 articles included 120 different surveys investigating 293 potential barriers to physician guideline adherence, including awareness (n = 46), familiarity(n = 31), agreement (n = 33), self-efficacy (n = 19), outcome expectancy (n = 8), ability to overcome the inertia of previous practice (n = 14), and absence of external barriers to perform recommendations (n = 34). The majority of surveys (70 [58%] of 120) examined only 1 type of barrier. Studies on improving physician guideline adherence may not be generalizable, since barriers in one setting may not be present in another. Our review offers a differential diagnosis for why physicians do not follow practice guidelines, as well as a rational approach toward improving guideline adherence and a framework for future research.JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 11/1999; 282(15):1458-65. · 29.98 Impact Factor