Article

Should Guidelines Incorporate Evidence on Patient Preferences?

Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.42). 09/2009; 24(8):988-90. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-009-1055-0
Source: PubMed
Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Craig A Umscheid, Jun 30, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
59 Views
  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There have been few evaluations of the quality of computerized decision support tools in medical oncology despite their widespread use in clinical practice. In this article, we provide an in-depth quality assessment of eviQ, an Australian web-based protocol system. We used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II) instrument to examine the quality of eviQ chemotherapy protocols across six domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence and overall quality rating. Domain scores were categorized as high quality (scores of >70%), moderate quality (30-70%), and low quality (<30%). eviQ was rated highly with respect to articulating its scope and purpose, clarity of presentation, applicability and on the overall rating item (scores of 72-80%). Domains addressing the involvement of stakeholders in the development process and the rigor with which protocols were developed were of moderate quality (scores of 34-37%) and the management of editorial independence and conflict of interest issues were rated in the low quality range (22%). Our evaluation demonstrated the eviQ protocol system is generally of high quality. However, we identified a number of areas in which eviQ could improve either its development processes or the means by which these processes are communicated to end-users. This research represents the first comprehensive evaluation of oncology protocols and paves the way for continued quality assurance research to ensure that these tools meet their objective of facilitating evidence-based medicine, standardizing treatment and, ultimately, improving patient outcomes.
    Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology 12/2011; 7(4):357-63. DOI:10.1111/j.1743-7563.2011.01431.x · 1.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Despite a strong movement towards active patient involvement in healthcare policy decisions, systematic and explicit consideration of evidence of this research on patient preferences seems limited. Furthermore, little is known about the opinions of several stakeholders towards consideration of research evidence on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. This paper describes the protocol for an explorative study on the integration of research on patient preferences in healthcare policy decisions. The study questions: to what extent research evidence on patient preferences is considered in current procedures for healthcare policy decisions; opinions of stakeholders regarding the integration of this type of evidence in healthcare policy decisions; and what could be a decision framework for the integration of such research evidence in healthcare policy decisions.Methods/design: The study is divided in three sub-studies, predominantly using qualitative methods. The first sub-study is a scoping review in five European countries to investigate whether and how results of research on patient preferences are considered in current procedures for coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development. The second sub-study is a qualitative study to explore the opinions of stakeholders with regard to the possibilities for integrating evidence on patient preferences in the process of healthcare decision-making in the Netherlands. The third sub-study is the development of a decision framework for research on patient preferences. The framework will consist of: a process description regarding the place of evidence on patient preferences in the decision-making process; and a taxonomy describing different terminologies and conceptualisations of 'preferences' and an overview of existing methodologies for investigating preferences. The concept framework will be presented to and discussed with experts. DISCUSSION: This study will create awareness regarding the existence and potential value of research evidence on patient preferences for healthcare policy decision-making and provides insight in the methods for investigating patient preferences and the barriers and facilitators for integration of such research in healthcare policy decisions. Results of the study will be useful for researchers, clinical practice guideline developers, healthcare policy makers, and patient representatives.
    Implementation Science 06/2013; 8(1):64. DOI:10.1186/1748-5908-8-64 · 3.47 Impact Factor