Abstract
Clinical practice guidelines are systematically developed statements to assist practitioners and patients reach appropriate health care decisions. If developed properly, clinical practice guidelines assimilate and translate an abundance of evidence published on a daily basis into practice recommendations and, in doing so, reduce the use of unnecessary or harmful interventions, and facilitate the treatment of patients to achieve maximum benefit and minimum risk at an acceptable cost. Traditionally, clinical practice guidelines were consensus-based statements, often riddled with expert opinion. It is now recognized that clinical practice guidelines should be developed according to a transparent process involving principles of bias minimization and systematic evidence retrieval and review, with a focus on patient-relevant outcomes. The process for the development, implementation, and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines is reviewed in this chapter.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Hayward RS, Wilson MC, Tunis SR, Bass EB, Guyatt G (1995) Users’ guides to the medical literature. VIII. How to use clinical practice guidelines. A. Are the recommendations valid? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 274:570–574
The National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (1999) A guide to the development, implementation, and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines. The National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Canberra, ACT
Browman GP (2001) Development and aftercare of clinical guidelines: the balance between rigor and pragmatism. JAMA 286:1509–1511
World Health Organization (2003) Guidelines for WHO guidelines. Global programme on evidence for health policy. World Health Organization, Geneva
Guyatt G, Vist G, Falck-Ytter Y, Kunz R, Magrini N, Schunemann H (2006) An emerging consensus on grading recommendations? Evid Based Med 11:2–4
Uhlig K, Macleod A, Craig J, Lau J, Levey AS, Levin A, Moist L, Steinberg E, Walker R, Wanner C, Lameire N, Eknoyan G (2006) Grading evidence and recommendations for clinical practice guidelines in nephrology. A position statement from kidney disease: improving global outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int 70:2058–2065
Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O’Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schunemann HJ, Edejer TT, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Zaza S (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328:1490
Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS (2002) Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 287:612–617
Taylor R, Giles J (2005) Cash interests taint drug advice. Nature 437:1070–1071
Editorial (2005) Clinical practice guidelines and conflict of interest. CMAJ 173:1297–1299
Campbell N, McAlister FA (2006) Not all guidelines are created equal. CMAJ 174:814–815
Narins RG, Bennett WM (2007) Patient care guidelines: problems and solutions. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2:1–2
Coyne DW (2007) Influence of industry on renal guideline development. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2:3–7
Field MJ, Lohr KN (1992) Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press, Washington, DC
Shekelle PG, Ortiz E, Rhodes S, Morton SC, Eccles MP, Grimshaw JM, Woolf SH (2001) Validity of the agency for healthcare research and quality clinical practice guidelines: how quickly do guidelines become outdated? JAMA 286:1461–1467
Zarnke KB, Campbell NR, McAlister FA, Levine M (2000) A novel process for updating recommendations for managing hypertension: rationale and methods. Can J Cardiol 16:1094–1102
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Culleton, B. (2015). Evidence-Based Decision-Making 4: Development and Limitations of Clinical Practice Guidelines. In: Parfrey, P., Barrett, B. (eds) Clinical Epidemiology. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1281. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2428-8_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2428-8_26
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2427-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2428-8
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols