The systematic guideline review: method, rationale, and test on chronic heart failure

Background: Evidence-based guidelines have the potential to improve healthcare. However, their de-novo-development requires substantial resources-especially for complex conditions, and adaptation may be biased by contextually influenced recommendations in source guidelines. In this paper we describe a new approach to guideline development-the systematic guideline review method (SGR), and its application in the development of an evidence-based guideline for family physicians on chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: A systematic search for guidelines was carried out. Evidence-based guidelines on CHF management in adults in ambulatory care published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2004 were included. Guidelines on acute or right heart failure were excluded. Eligibility was assessed by two reviewers, methodological quality of selected guidelines was appraised using the AGREE instrument, and a framework of relevant clinical questions for diagnostics and treatment was derived. Data were extracted into evidence tables, systematically compared by means of a consistency analysis and synthesized in a preliminary draft. Most relevant primary sources were re-assessed to verify the cited evidence. Evidence and recommendations were summarized in a draft guideline. Results: Of 16 included guidelines five were of good quality. A total of 35 recommendations were systematically compared: 25/35 were consistent, 9/35 inconsistent, and 1/35 un-rateable (derived from a single guideline). Of the 25 consistencies, 14 were based on consensus, seven on evidence and four differed in grading. Major inconsistencies were found in 3/9 of the inconsistent recommendations. We re-evaluated the evidence for 17 recommendations (evidence-based, differing evidence levels and minor inconsistencies) - the majority was congruent. Incongruity was found where the stated evidence could not be verified in the cited primary sources, or where the evaluation in the source guidelines focused on treatment benefits and underestimated the risks. The draft guideline was completed in 8.5 man-months. The main limitation to this study was the lack of a second reviewer. Conclusion: The systematic guideline review including framework development, consistency analysis and validation is an effective, valid, and resource saving-approach to the development of evidence-based guidelines

Synthesising practice guidelines for the development of community-based exercise programmes after stroke

This is a freely-available open access publication. Please cite the published version which is available via the DOI link in this record.Multiple guidelines are often available to inform practice in complex interventions. Guidance implementation may be facilitated if it is tailored to particular clinical issues and contexts. It should also aim to specify all elements of interventions that may mediate and modify effectiveness, including both their content and delivery. We conducted a focused synthesis of recommendations from stroke practice guidelines to produce a structured and comprehensive account to facilitate the development of community-based exercise programmes after stroke.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for the South West Peninsul

Prioritizing WHO normative work on maternal and perinatal health: a multicountry survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>WHO develops evidence-based guidelines for setting global standards and providing technical support to its Member States and the international community, as a whole. There is a clear need to ensure that WHO guidance is relevant, rigorous and up-to date. A key activity is to ascertain the guidance needs of the countries. This study provides an international comparison of priority guidance needs for maternal and perinatal health. It incorporates data from those who inform policy and implementation strategies at a national level, in addition to targeting those who use and most need the guidance at grassroot level.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An online multi-country survey was used to identify WHO guidance priorities for the next five years in the field of maternal and perinatal health. WHO regional and country offices were requested to respond the survey and obtain responses from Ministries of Health around the world. In addition, the survey was disseminated through other networks and relevant electronic forums.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 393 responses were received, including 56 from Ministries of Health and 54 from WHO/UN country offices. 75% of responses were from developing countries and 25% from developed countries. Guidance on strategies focusing on 'quality of care' issues to reduce all-cause maternal/perinatal mortality was considered the most important domain to target, which includes for instance guidance to improve access, dissemination, implementation of effective practices and health professionals' education.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study provides a panorama of international priority guidance needs for maternal and perinatal health. Although clinical guidance remains a priority, there are other areas related to health systems guidance, which seem to be even more important. Overall, the domain ranked highest in terms of greatest need for guidance was around quality of care, which included questions related to educational needs, access to and implementation of guidance.</p