Review of the utilization of the RAND appropriateness method in the biomedical literature (1999-2004);Evaluación del uso apropiado de procedimientos sanitarios mediante el método RAND: revisión de su aplicación en la literatura biomédica (1999-2004)

Gaceta Sanitaria

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 232-237

  González, Nerea ^a,d   Quintana, José M ^a,d   Lacalle, Juan Ramón ^b,d   Chic, Susana ^c   Maroto, David ^a,d  

^a HOSPITAL DE GALDAKAO   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SEVILLE   (Spain)

^c Fundacion Hospital de Calahorra   (Spain)

^d CIBER EPIDEMIOLOGÍA Y SALUD PÚBLICA CIBERESP   (Spain)

Author keywords

Appropriateness; RAND method; Review

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; REVIEW; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 67349155523     PISSN: 02139111     EISSN: 15781283     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2007.06.001     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Kahan J.P., and Van het Loo M. Defining appropriate health care. Eurohealth. 5 (1999) 16-18
2. Martínez-Sahuquillo M.E., and Echevarria Ruiz de Vargas M.C. Métodos de consenso. Uso adecuado de la evidencia en la toma de decisiones. Método RAND/UCLA. Rehabilitación. 35 (2001) 388-392
3. Wennberg J. The paradox of appropriate care. JAMA. 258 (1987) 2568-2569
4. Chassin M.R., Kosecoff J., Park R.E., et al. Does inappropriate use explain geographic variation in the use of health care services?. JAMA. 258 (1987) 2533-2537
5. Feinstein A.R., and Horwitz R.I. Problems in the «evidence» of «evidence-based medicine». Am J Med. 103 (1997) 529-535
6. Quintana J.M., Arostegui I., Azkarate J., et al. Evaluation of explicit criteria for total hip joint replacement. J Clin Epidemiol. 53 (2000) 1200-1208
7. Campbell S.M., and Cantrill J.A. Consensus methods in prescribing research. J Clin Pharm Ther. 26 (2001) 5-14
8. Brook R.H., Chassin M.R., Fink A., et al. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical techonologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2 (1986) 53-63
9. Aguilar M.D., Fitch K., Lazaro P., et al. The appropriateness of use of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in Spain. Int J Cardiol. 78 (2001) 213-221
10. Alexopoulos G.S., Streim J., Carpenter D., et al. Expert Consensus Panel for Using Antipsychotic Drugs in Older Patients. Using antipsychotic agents in older patients. J Clin Psychiatry. 65 Suppl 2 (2004) 5-99
11. Escobar A., Quintana J.M., Arostegui I., et al. Development of explicit criteria for total knee replacement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 19 (2003) 57-70
12. Oishi S.M., Morton S.C., Moore A.A., et al. Using data to enhance the expert panel process. Rating indications of alcoholrelated problems in older adults. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 17 (2001) 125-136
13. Stoevelaar H.J., McDonnell J., Van de Beek C., et al. Appropriate treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia; refining the indications for treatment by systematic analysis of expert opinion (Passende behandeling bij benigne prostaathyperplasie; verfijning van de indicatiestelling door systematische analyse van klinische expertise). [Dutch] Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 143 (1999) 2425-2429
14. Vader J.P., Burnand B., Froehlich F., et al. The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): project and methods. Endoscopy. 31 (1999) 572-578
15. Vader J.P., Hammig R., Besson J., et al. Appropriateness of methadone maintenance treatment for opiate addiction: evaluation by an expert panel. Sozial und Präventivmedizin. 48 (2003) 1S-14S
16. Van het Loo M, Kahan JP. The RAND appropriateness method: an annotated bibliography through 1999. RAND Europe. Santa Monica: RAND Distribution Services; 1999. Disponible en: http://www.rand.org/pubs/rand_europe/RE99-010.
17. Reference Manager v.11 for Windows. Thomson ISI Research Soft, 2004.
18. SPSS versión 12.0 para Windows. Chicago: SPSS Inc.; 2003.
19. Shekelle P.G., MacLean C.H., Morton S.C., et al. Assessing care of vulnerable elders: methods for developing quality indicators. Ann Intern Med. 135 (2001) 647-652
20. Muijrers P.E., Janknegt R., Sijbrandij J., et al. Prescribing indicators. Development and validation of guidelinebased prescribing indicators as an instrument to measure the variation in the 0prescribing behaviour of general practitioners. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 60 (2004) 739-746
21. McGlynn E.A., Asch S.M., Adams J., et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 348 (2003) 2635-2645
22. Campbell S.M., Roland M.O., Shekelle P.G., et al. Development of review criteria for assessing the quality of management of stable angina, adult asthma, and noninsulin dependent diabetes mellitus in general practice. Qual Health Care. 8 (1999) 6-15
23. Tobacman J.K., Zimmerman B., Lee P., et al. Visual acuity following cataract surgeries in relation to preoperative appropriateness ratings. Med Decis Making. 23 (1999) 122-130
24. Halm E.A., Chassin M.R., Tuhrim S., et al. Revisiting the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy. Stroke. 34 (2003) 1464-1471
25. Garg P.P., Landrum M.B., Normand S.L., et al. Understanding individual and small area variation in the underuse of coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction. Med Care. 40 (2002) 614-626
26. Hemingway H., Crook A.M., Dawson J.R., et al. Rating the appropriateness of coronary angiography, coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass grafting: the ACRE study. Appropriateness of Coronary Revascularisation Study. J Public Health Med. 21 (1999) 421-429
27. Feder G., Crook A.M., Magee P., et al. Ethnic differences in invasive management of coronary disease: prospective cohort study of patients undergoing angiography. BMJ. 324 (2002) 511-516
28. Froehlich F., Gonvers J.J., Vader J.P., et al. Appropriateness of gastrointestinal endoscopy: risk of complications. Endoscopy. 31 (1999) 684-686
29. SeematterBagnoud L., Vader J.P., Wietlisbach V., et al. Overuse and underuse of diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in various clinical settings. Int J Qual Health Care. 11 (1999) 301-308
30. Quintana J.M., Cabriada J., De Tejada I.L., et al. Development of explicit criteria for cholecystectomy. Qual Saf Health Care. 11 (2002) 320-326
31. Aguilar M.D., Lazaro P., Fitch K., et al. Gender differences in clinical status at time of coronary revascularisation in Spain. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 56 (2002) 555-559
32. Stoevelaar H.J., McDonnell J., Stals H., et al. Gastroprotective treatment in patients using NSAIDs. Development of appropriateness criteria by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Scand J Rheumatol. 32 (2003) 162-167
33. McDonnell J., Stoevelaar H.J., Bosch J.L., et al. The appropriateness of treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a comparison of Dutch and multinational criteria. Health Policy. 57 (2001) 45-56
34. Fantini M.P., Negro A., Accorsi S., et al. Development and assessment of a priority score for cataract surgery. Can J Ophthalmol. 39 (2004) 48-55
35. Filardo G., Maggioni A.P., Mura G., et al. The consequences of underuse of coronary revascularization; results of a cohort study in Northern Italy. Eur Heart J. 22 (2001) 654-662
36. Goodman JC. «Necessary» and «unnecessary» medical care. En: Goodman JC, editor. The American experience with managed care. Dallas: National Center for Policy Analysis; 2002. p. 11-7.
37. Frinking E, Kahan JP, Van het Loo M, et al. Risk profiles and appropriate treatment therapies for whiplash associated disorders. Synthesis report conducted for the Swiss Insurance Association (SIA). Lausanne: SIA; 2003.
38. Kerr EA, Asch SM, Hamilton EG, et al. Quality of care for general medical conditions: a review of the literature and quality indicators. Santa Monica: RAND Health; 2000. MR1280AHRQ. Disponible en: http://www.rand.org/cgibin/Abstracts/abdb.pl.
39. Phelps C.E. The methodological foundations of studies of the appropriateness of medical care. N Engl J Med 329 (1993) 1241-1245
40. Kravitz R.L., Laouri M., Kahan J.P., et al. Validity of criteria used for detecting underuse of coronary revascularization. JAMA. 274 (1995) 632-638
41. McKee M., Priest P., Ginzler M., et al. How representative are members of expert panels. Qual Assur Health Care. 3 (1991) 89-94
42. Scott E.A., and Black N. When does consensus exist in expert panels. J Public Health Med. 13 (1991) 35-39
43. Shekelle P., Kahan J.P., Park R.E., et al. Assessing appropriateness by expert panels: how reliable?. J Gen Intern Med. 10 (1996) 81
44. Naylor C.D. What is appropriate care?. N Engl J Med. 338 (1998) 1918-1920
45. Shekelle P., Kahan J.P., Bernstein S.J., et al. The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of procedures. N Engl J Med. 338 (1998) 1888-1895
46. Shekelle P.G. The appropriateness method. Med Decis Making. 24 (2004) 228-231
47. Fitch K., Berstein S.J., Aguilar M.D., et al. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method user's manual. MR1269DGXII/RE (2001), RAND, Santa Monica
48. Altshuler LL, Cohen LS, Moline ML, et al. The Expert Consensus Guideline Series. Treatment of depression in women. Postgrad Med. 2001. p. 1-107.
49. Hannan E.L., Van Ryn M., Burke J., et al. Access to coronary artery bypass surgery by race/ethnicity and gender among patients who are appropriate for surgery. Med Care. 37 (1999) 68-77
50. Porchet F., Vader J.P., Larequi-Lauber T., et al. The assessment of appropriate indications for laminectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 81 (1999) 234-239
51. Kohut M., Romanczyk T., Nowak A., et al. Estimation of appropriateness of colonoscopy using RAND/UCLA method (Ocena zasadnosci przeprowadzania kolonoskopii z wykorzystaniem metody RAND/UCLA). [Polish]. Wiad Lek. 57 (2004) 321-326
52. NicollierFahrni A., Vader J.P., Froehlich F., et al. Development of appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy: comparison between a standardized expert panel and an evidencebased medicine approach. Int J Qual Health Care. 15 (2003) 15-22
53. Bochud M., Gonvers J.J., Vader J.P., et al. Appropriateness of gastroscopy: gastroesophageal reflux disease. Endoscopy. 31 (1999) 596-603