Selecting, presenting and delivering clinical guidelines: Are there any "magic bullets"?

Medical Journal of Australia

Volumn 180, Issue 6 SUPPL., 2004, Pages

  Eccles, Martin P ^a   Grimshaw, Jeremy M ^b  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; MEDICAL CARE; PATIENT CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SKILL;

EID: 1642401290     PISSN: 0025729X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb05946.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, et al. Clinical guidelines: the potential benefits, limitations and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999; 318: 527-530.
2. Shekelle PG, Woolf SH, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Developing guidelines. BMJ 1999; 318: 593-596.
3. Cluzeau F, Littlejohn P, Grimshaw JM, et al. Development of a valid and reliable methodology for appraising the quality of clinical guidelines. Int J Qual Health Care 1999; 11: 21-28.
4. The AGREE Collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: The AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care 2003; 12: 18-23. Available at: Www.agreecollaboration.org (accessed Jan 2004).
5. Shaneyfelt TM, Mayo-Smith MF, Rothwangl J. Are guidelines following guidelines? JAMA 1999; 281: 1900-1905.
6. Burgers JS, Cluzeau FA, Hanna SE, et al. Characteristics of high-quality guidelines: Evaluation of 86 clinical guidelines developed in ten European countries and Canada. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003; 19: 148-157.
7. Grilli R, Magrini N, Penna A. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: The need for a critical appraisal. Lancet 2000: 355: 103-106.
8. Grol R, Dalhuijsen J, Thomas S, et al. Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: observational study. BMJ 1998; 317: 858-861.
9. Burgers JS, Grol RP, Zaat JO, et al. Characteristics of effective guidelines for general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2003; 53: 15-19.
10. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1995.
11. Rogers EM. Lessons for guidelines from the diffusion of innovations. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 1995; 21: 324-328.
12. Foy R, MacLennan G, Grimshaw J, et al. Attributes of clinical recommendations that influence change in practice following audit and feedback. J Clin Epidemiol 2002; 55: 717-722.
13. Davis D, Tailor-Vaisey A. Translating guidelines into practice: A systematic review of theoretic concepts, practical experience and research evidence in the adoption of clinical practice guidelines. CMAJ 1997; 157: 408-416.
14. Freemantle N, Harvey EL, Wolf F, et al. Printed educational materials to improve the behaviour of health care professionals and patient outcomes. In: Bero L, Grilli R, Grimshaw J, Oxman A, editors. Collaboration on Effective Professional Practice module of the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 1998. Oxford: Update Software.
15. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004. In press.
16. Mason J, Freemantle N, Young P. The effect of the distribution of Effective Health Care Bulletins on prescribing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in primary care. Health Trends 1999; 30: 120-122.
17. Mason J, Freemantle N, Browning G. Impact of Effective Health Care bulletin on treatment of persistent glue ear in children: Time series analysis. BMJ 2001; 323: 1096-1097.
18. Baker R, Fraser RC. Development of review criteria: Linking guidelines and assessment of quality. BMJ 1995; 311: 370-373.
19. Baker R, Fraser RC, Stone M, et al. Randomised controlled trial of the impact of guidelines, prioritized review criteria and feedback on implementation of recommendations for angina and asthma. Br J Gen Pract 2003; 53: 284-291.
20. Friedman CP, Wyatt JC. Evaluation methods in medical informatics. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1997.
21. Johnston ME, Langton KB, Haynes B, Mathieu A. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome: A critical appraisal of research. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 135-142.
22. Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes. JAMA 1998; 280: 1339-1346.
23. Shea S, DuMouchel W, Bahamonde L. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials to evaluate computer-based clinical reminder systems for preventative care in the ambulatory setting. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1996; 3: 399-409.
24. Hetlevik I, Holman J, Krüger Ø, et al. Implementing clinical guidelines in the treatment of hypertension in general practice. Scand J Prim Health Care 1999; 17: 35-40.
25. Hetlevik I, Holman J, Krüger Ø, et al. Implementing clinical guidelines in the treatment of diabetes mellitus in general practice. Evaluation of effort, process and patient outcome related to implementation of a computer-based decision support system. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 210-227.
26. Eccles M, McColl E, Steen N, et al. Effect of computerised evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: Cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2002; 325: 941-944.
27. James BC. Making it easy to do right. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 991-992.
28. Foy R, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Why does primary care need more implementation research? Fam Pract 2001; 18: 353-355.