Systematic review of economic evaluations and cost analyses of guideline implementation strategies

Objectives To appraise the quality of economic studies undertaken as part of evaluations of guideline implementation strategies; determine their resources use; and recommend methods to improve future studies. Methods Systematic review of economic studies undertaken alongside robust study designs of clinical guideline implementation strategies published (1966-1998). Studies assessed against the BMJ economic evaluations guidelines for each stage of the guideline process (guideline development, implementation and treatment). Results 235 studies were identified, 63 reported some information on cost. Only 3 studies provided evidence that their guideline was effective and efficient. 38 reported the treatment costs only, 12 implementation and treatment costs, 11 implementation costs alone, and two guideline development, implementation and treatment costs. No study gave reasonably complete information on costs. Conclusions Very few satisfactory economic evaluations of guideline implementation strategies have been performed. Current evaluations have numerous methodological defects and rarely consider all relevant costs and benefits. Future evaluations should focus on evaluating the implementation of evidence based guidelines. Keywords: Cost-effectiveness analysis, physician (or health care professional) behaviour, practice guidelines, quality improvement, systematic review.Peer reviewedAuthor versio

Can oncology nurses treat depression? A pilot project

BACKGROUND: Depression is a common problem in all medically ill populations. Reported prevalence rates of major depression in patients with cancer are up to 50%. Cancer patients attending primary care and medical outpatient clinics with comorbid major depressive disorder frequently do not receive effective treatment. More effective ways of identifying and treating patients with both cancer and depression are therefore urgently required. AIM: The paper reports a study addressing the question of whether oncology nurses can be trained to take on a greater role in the management of major depression in their patients. METHOD: We developed and piloted an intervention that can be delivered by a specially trained oncology nurse. The intervention is multifaceted and based on a problem-solving model. It requires a widening of the role and expertise of specialist nurses. DISCUSSION: The challenges this role presents to the nurses are discussed. We suggest that they must have a varied work programme that is not exclusively about managing depression, that they require adequate peer support and are likely to be most effective when working as part of a multidisciplinary psycho-oncology team. CONCLUSION: We conclude that it is possible to train selected specialist oncology nurses to manage major depression in patients with cancer in the context of an appropriately constituted multidisciplinary team