Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2/2010

01-06-2010 | Current Opinion

‘New’ Evidence for Clinical Practice Guidelines

Should we Search for ‘Preference Evidence’?

Author: Dr Murray Krahn

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 2/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are systematically developed statements to assist both patient and practitioner decisions. They link the practice of medicine more closely to the body of underlying evidence, shift the burden of evidence review from the individual practitioner to experts, and aim to improve the quality of care. CPGs do not routinely search for or include evidence related to patients’ values and preferences. We argue that they should. We think that such evidence can tell us whether a decision is preference sensitive; how patients feel about important health outcomes, treatment goals, and decisions; and whether preferences vary in different types of patients. The likely effects of reviewing the literature are a general sensitization to the importance of preferences in decision making, the recognition that some decisions are simply all about preferences, a more considered approach to forming preferences among patients and other stakeholders, and more effective integration of preferences into decisions.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Davis D, Goldman J, Palda V. Handbook on clinical practice guidelines. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Medical Association, 2007: 34 Davis D, Goldman J, Palda V. Handbook on clinical practice guidelines. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Medical Association, 2007: 34
2.
go back to reference Krahn M, Naglie G. The next step in guideline development: incorporating patient preferences. JAMA 2008; 300(4): 436–8PubMedCrossRef Krahn M, Naglie G. The next step in guideline development: incorporating patient preferences. JAMA 2008; 300(4): 436–8PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference O’Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, et al. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ 1999; 319(7212): 731–4PubMedCrossRef O’Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, et al. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ 1999; 319(7212): 731–4PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Volk RJ, Cass AR, Spann SJ. A randomized controlled trial of shared decision making for prostate cancer screening. Arch Fam Med 1999; 8: 333–40PubMedCrossRef Volk RJ, Cass AR, Spann SJ. A randomized controlled trial of shared decision making for prostate cancer screening. Arch Fam Med 1999; 8: 333–40PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Sculpher M, Gafni A, Watt I. Shared treatment decision making in a collectively funded health care system: possible conflicts and some potential solutions. Soc Sci Med 2002; 54(9): 1369–77PubMedCrossRef Sculpher M, Gafni A, Watt I. Shared treatment decision making in a collectively funded health care system: possible conflicts and some potential solutions. Soc Sci Med 2002; 54(9): 1369–77PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement. Health Res Policy Syst 2006; 4: 22PubMedCrossRef Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement. Health Res Policy Syst 2006; 4: 22PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Pagliari C, Topalian J. Consumer involvement in guideline development: an international survey of strategies and experiences. Guideline International Network Conference; 2007 Aug 22–25; Toronto (ON) Pagliari C, Topalian J. Consumer involvement in guideline development: an international survey of strategies and experiences. Guideline International Network Conference; 2007 Aug 22–25; Toronto (ON)
9.
go back to reference Dolan P, Tsuchiya A, Wailoo A. NICE’s citizen’s council: what do we ask them, and how? Lancet 2003; 362(9387): 918–9PubMedCrossRef Dolan P, Tsuchiya A, Wailoo A. NICE’s citizen’s council: what do we ask them, and how? Lancet 2003; 362(9387): 918–9PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Chong CA, Chen IJ, Naglie G, et al. How well do guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24(8): 977–82PubMedCrossRef Chong CA, Chen IJ, Naglie G, et al. How well do guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24(8): 977–82PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference 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(1): 18–23CrossRef 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(1): 18–23CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Shaneyfelt TM, Centor RM. Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines: go gently into that good night. JAMA 2009; 301(8): 868–9PubMedCrossRef Shaneyfelt TM, Centor RM. Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines: go gently into that good night. JAMA 2009; 301(8): 868–9PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Umscheid CA. Should guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24(8): 988–90PubMedCrossRef Umscheid CA. Should guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24(8): 988–90PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Alibhai SM, Naglie G, Nam R, et al. Do older men benefit from curative therapy of localized prostate cancer? J Clin Oncol 2003; 21(17): 3318–27PubMedCrossRef Alibhai SM, Naglie G, Nam R, et al. Do older men benefit from curative therapy of localized prostate cancer? J Clin Oncol 2003; 21(17): 3318–27PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1989; 5: 559–75PubMedCrossRef Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1989; 5: 559–75PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Krahn M, Ritvo P, Irvine J, et al. Patient and community preferences for outcomes in prostate cancer: implications for clinical policy. Med Care 2003; 41(1): 153–64PubMedCrossRef Krahn M, Ritvo P, Irvine J, et al. Patient and community preferences for outcomes in prostate cancer: implications for clinical policy. Med Care 2003; 41(1): 153–64PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Volk RJ, Cantor SB, Cass AR, et al. Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment. J Gen Intern Med 2004; 19(4): 339–48PubMedCrossRef Volk RJ, Cantor SB, Cass AR, et al. Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment. J Gen Intern Med 2004; 19(4): 339–48PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Cantor SB, Volk RJ, Krahn MD, et al. Concordance of couples’ prostate cancer screening recommendations from a decision analysis. Patient 2008; 1(1): 11–9PubMedCrossRef Cantor SB, Volk RJ, Krahn MD, et al. Concordance of couples’ prostate cancer screening recommendations from a decision analysis. Patient 2008; 1(1): 11–9PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 2008; 358(12): 1250–61PubMedCrossRef Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 2008; 358(12): 1250–61PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Willener R, Hantikainen V. Individual quality of life following radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer. Urol Nurs 2005; 25(2): 88–90, 95-100PubMed Willener R, Hantikainen V. Individual quality of life following radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer. Urol Nurs 2005; 25(2): 88–90, 95-100PubMed
23.
go back to reference Constantinescu F, Goucher S, Weinstein A, et al. Understanding why rheumatoid arthritis patient treatment preferences differ by race. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 61(4): 413–8PubMedCrossRef Constantinescu F, Goucher S, Weinstein A, et al. Understanding why rheumatoid arthritis patient treatment preferences differ by race. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 61(4): 413–8PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Tong A, Morton R, Howard K, et al. Adolescent experiences following organ transplantation: a systematic review of qualitative studies. J Pediatr 2009; 155(4): 542–9PubMedCrossRef Tong A, Morton R, Howard K, et al. Adolescent experiences following organ transplantation: a systematic review of qualitative studies. J Pediatr 2009; 155(4): 542–9PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Van HL, Schoevers RA, Dekker J. Predicting the outcome of antidepressants and psychotherapy for depression: a qualitative, systematic review. Harv Rev Psychiatry 2008; 16(4): 225–34PubMedCrossRef Van HL, Schoevers RA, Dekker J. Predicting the outcome of antidepressants and psychotherapy for depression: a qualitative, systematic review. Harv Rev Psychiatry 2008; 16(4): 225–34PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Detsky AS, Naglie G, Krahn MD, et al. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 1. Getting started. Med Decis Making 1997; 17(2): 123–5PubMedCrossRef Detsky AS, Naglie G, Krahn MD, et al. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 1. Getting started. Med Decis Making 1997; 17(2): 123–5PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH. Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. ACP J Club 2002; 136(2): A11–4 Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH. Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. ACP J Club 2002; 136(2): A11–4
Metadata
Title
‘New’ Evidence for Clinical Practice Guidelines
Should we Search for ‘Preference Evidence’?
Author
Dr Murray Krahn
Publication date
01-06-2010
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 2/2010
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/11535370-000000000-00000

Other articles of this Issue 2/2010

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2/2010 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine