Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application of Comparative Effectiveness Research to Promote Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Decision Making in a World of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) ideally should be used to inform clinical practice guidelines. The challenge is to effectively incorporate CER into guidelines and to promote adherence to these clinical practice guidelines. CER can serve as a tool for continuous quality improvement of clinical practice guidelines. Thousands of clinical practice guidelines exist, of varying quality, and often offer conflicting recommendations. In this chapter, we examine why clinicians do not follow agreed-upon evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using clinical practice guidelines and how they are adopted into practice. We discuss the measurement of adherence to clinical practice guidelines and the effect of multiple medical conditions and multiple clinical guidelines on adherence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sox HC, Greenfield S (2009) Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann Intern Med 151(3):203–205 Epub 2009 Jun 30. PubMed PMID: 19567618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Institute of Medicine (US) (2009) Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research. National Academies Press (US), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  3. Institute of Medicine (US) (2011) PubMed PMID: 22514810 In: Olsen LA, Saunders RS, JM MG (eds) Patients charting the course: citizen engagement and the learning health system: workshop summary. National Academies Press (US), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cifu A, Davis A, Livingston E (2014) Introducing JAMA clinical guidelines synopsis. JAMA 312(12):1208–1209

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Stange KC (2006) On track: medical research must consider context and complexity. Ann Fam Med 4:369–370. doi:10.1370/afm.613

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Carl Heneghan. Carl Heneghan’s blog. Retrieved 24 March 2016, from: http://blogs.trusttheevidence.net/carl-heneghan/how-many-randomized-trials-are-published-each-year

  7. Carter HB (2013) American Urological Association (AUA) guideline on prostate cancer detection: process and rationale. BJU Int 112(5):543–547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McCulloch DK, Hayward RA. Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus. In: UpToDate. UpToDate. 2016. Retrieved 2 May 2016, from: http://www.uptodate.com/contents/screening-for-type-2-diabetes-mellitus

  9. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (2008) Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 148(11):846–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Community engagement: improving health and wellbeing and reducing health inequalities. Guidance and guidelines; NICE guidelines [NG44]. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2016. Retrieved 24 March 2016, from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/NG44

  11. Coulter A (2012) Patient engagement – what works? J Ambul Care Manage 35(2):80–89. doi:10.1097/JAC.0b013e318249e0fd Review. PubMedPMID: 22415281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Djulbegovic B, Guyatt GH (2014) Evidence-based practice is not synonymous with delivery of uniform health care. JAMA 312(13):1293–1294. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10713 PubMed PMID: 25268433

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith SC, Benjamin EJ, Bonow RO, Braun LT, Creager MA, Franklin BA et al (2011) AHA/ACCF secondary prevention and risk reduction therapy for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2011 update: a guideline from the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology Foundation. Circulation 124(22):2458–2473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Koshman S, Johnson J (2005) Consensus, cost-effectiveness and clinical practice guidelines. Can J Diabetes 29:374–376

    Google Scholar 

  15. Harris S, McFarlane P, Lank C (2005) Consensus, cost-effectiveness and clinical practice guidelines: author’s response. Can J Diabetes 29:376–378

    Google Scholar 

  16. Canadian Diabetes Association. Position statement and paper. Canadian Diabetes Association. 2011. Retrieved 24 March 2016, from: http://www.diabetes.ca/newsroom/search-news/position-statement-and-paper

  17. Van Spall HG, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA (2007) Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: a systematic sampling review. JAMA 297(11):1233–1240 Review. PubMed PMID: 17374817

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Guthrie B, Payne K, Alderson P, McMurdo MET, Mercer SW (2012) Adapting clinical guidelines to take account of multimorbidity. BMJ 345(oct04_1):e6341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Boyd CM, Vollenweider D, Puhan MA (2012) Informing evidence-based decision-making for patients with comorbidity: availability of necessary information in clinical trials for chronic diseases. PLoS One 7(8):e41601. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041601 Epub 2012 Aug 3. Review. PubMed PMID: 22870234; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3411714

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Eurich DT, McAlister FA, Blackburn DF, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, Varney J, Johnson JA (2007) Benefits and harms of antidiabetic agents in patients with diabetes and heart failure: systemic review. BMJ 335:497–501. doi:10.1136/bmj.39314.620174.80

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Tinetti ME, Bogardus ST Jr, Agostini JV (2004) Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. N Engl J Med 351(27):2870–2874 PubMed PMID: 15625341

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Perk J, De Backer G, Gohlke H, Graham I, Reiner Z, Verschuren M et al (2012) European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012). The Fifth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts). Eur Heart J 33(13):1635–1701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Chamberlain JJ, Rhinehart AS, Shaefer CF, Neuman A (2016) Diagnosis and management of diabetes: synopsis of the 2016 American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes. Ann Intern Med 164(8):542–552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bell DS (2003) Heart failure: the frequent, forgotten, and often fatal complication of diabetes. Diabetes Care 26(8):2433–2441 PMID:12882875

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2014. Diabetes Care 2014 Jan;37(Supplement 1): S14–S80. Https://doi.org/10.2337/dc14-s014

  26. Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW (2005) Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA 294(6):716–724 PubMed PMID: 16091574

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: An approach for clinicians (2012) Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians: American geriatrics society expert panel on the care of older adults with multimorbidity. J Am Geriatr Soc 60(10):E1–E25. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04188.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sox HC (2014) Do clinical guidelines still make sense? Yes. Ann Fam Med 12(3):200–201. doi:10.1370/afm.1657 Erratum in: Ann Fam Med. 2014;12(4):301. PubMed PMID: 24821889; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4018366

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J (1999) Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 318(7182):527–530 Review. PubMed PMID: 10024268; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1114973

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O (2004) Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 82(4):581–629 Review. PubMed PMID: 15595944; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2690184

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Lugtenberg M, Zegers-van Schaick JM, Westert GP, Burgers JS (2009) Why don’t physicians adhere to guideline recommendations in practice? An analysis of barriers among Dutch general practitioners. Implement Sci 4:54. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-54 PubMed PMID: 19674440; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2734568

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Casey DE Jr (2013) Why don’t physicians (and patients) consistently follow clinical practice guidelines? JAMA Intern Med 173(17):1581–1583 PubMed PMID: 23897435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abboud PA, Rubin HR (1999) Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA 282(15):1458–1465 Review. PubMed PMID: 10535437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mercuri M, Sherbino J, Sedran RJ, Frank JR, Gafni A, Norman G. When guidelines don’t guide: the effect of patient context on management decisions based on clinical practice guidelines. Acad Med. 2015 90(2):191–196. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000542. PubMed

  36. ALLHAT Officers, Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group (2002) The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 288(23):2981–2997 Erratum in: JAMA. 2004;291(18):2196. JAMA 2003;289(2):178. PubMed PMID: 12479763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, Jones DW, Materson BJ, Oparil S, Wright JT Jr, Roccella EJ, Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee (2003) Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 42(6):1206–1252 Epub 2003 Dec 1. PubMed PMID: 14656957

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ, Howlett-Smith H, Stern BJ, Hertzberg VS, Frankel MR, Levine SR, Chaturvedi S, Kasner SE, Benesch CG, Sila CA, Jovin TG, Romano JG, Warfarin-Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease Trial Investigators (2005) Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med 352(13):1305–1316 PubMed PMID: 15800226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Juurlink DN, Mamdani MM, Lee DS, Kopp A, Austin PC, Laupacis A, Redelmeier DA (2004) Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. N Engl J Med 351(6):543–551 PubMed PMID: 15295047

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Schectman JM, Schroth WS, Verme D, Voss JD (2003) Randomized controlled trial of education and feedback for implementation of guidelines for acute low back pain. J Gen Intern Med 18(10):773–780 PubMed PMID: 14521638; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1494929

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Joseph AM, Arikian NJ, An LC, Nugent SM, Sloan RJ, Pieper CF, GIFT Research Group (2004) Results of a randomized controlled trial of intervention to implement smoking guidelines in Veterans Affairs medical centers: increased use of medications without cessation benefit. Med Care 42(11):1100–1110 PubMed PMID: 15586837

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Outcomes Research, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria, Peoria, USA

    Carl V. Asche PhD

  2. OSF HealthCare, Peoria, USA

    Stephen Hippler MD

  3. School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada

    Dean Eurich PhD

Authors
  1. Carl V. Asche PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen Hippler MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dean Eurich PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carl V. Asche PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Howard G. Birnbaum

  2. Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Paul E. Greenberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Asche, C.V., Hippler, S., Eurich, D. (2017). Application of Comparative Effectiveness Research to Promote Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines. In: Birnbaum, H., Greenberg, P. (eds) Decision Making in a World of Comparative Effectiveness Research. Adis, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3262-2_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3262-2_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Adis, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3261-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3262-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation