Clinical guidelines and patient related outcomes: summary of evidence and recommendations

Clinical guidelines and patient related outcomes: summary of evidence and recommendations PurposeGood medical practice, evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been recurring subjects in the scientific literature. EBM advocates argue that good medical practice should be guided by evidence-based CPG. On the other hand, critical authors of EBM methodology argue that various interests undermine the quality of evidence and reliability of CPG recommendations. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate patient related outcomes of CPG implementation, in light of EBM critics.Design/methodology/approachThe authors opted for a rapid literature review.FindingsThere are few studies evaluating the effectiveness of CPG in patient-related outcomes. The systematic reviews found are not conclusive, although they suggest a positive impact of CPGs in relevant outcomes.Research limitations/implicationsThis work was not a systematic review of literature, which is its main limitation. On the other hand, arguments from EBM and CPG critics were considered, and thus it can enlighten health institutions to recognize the caveats and to establish policies toward care improvement.Originality/valueThe paper is the first of its kind to discuss, based on the published literature, next steps toward better health practice, while acknowledging the caveats of this process. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Health Governance Emerald Publishing

Clinical guidelines and patient related outcomes: summary of evidence and recommendations

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/clinical-guidelines-and-patient-related-outcomes-summary-of-evidence-GgPr4OiU4R
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PurposeGood medical practice, evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been recurring subjects in the scientific literature. EBM advocates argue that good medical practice should be guided by evidence-based CPG. On the other hand, critical authors of EBM methodology argue that various interests undermine the quality of evidence and reliability of CPG recommendations. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate patient related outcomes of CPG implementation, in light of EBM critics.Design/methodology/approachThe authors opted for a rapid literature review.FindingsThere are few studies evaluating the effectiveness of CPG in patient-related outcomes. The systematic reviews found are not conclusive, although they suggest a positive impact of CPGs in relevant outcomes.Research limitations/implicationsThis work was not a systematic review of literature, which is its main limitation. On the other hand, arguments from EBM and CPG critics were considered, and thus it can enlighten health institutions to recognize the caveats and to establish policies toward care improvement.Originality/valueThe paper is the first of its kind to discuss, based on the published literature, next steps toward better health practice, while acknowledging the caveats of this process.

Journal

International Journal of Health GovernanceEmerald Publishing

Published: Aug 21, 2019

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off