Dear All
I agree with Paul that if the CPG is developed from best evidences
(evidence-based guideline) : RCT, systematic review, it is not
necessary to test its effectiveness again. However we should have the
scheduled review for another updated evidences. About the evaluation
of the implementation, are there any good example articles for the
evaluation of the implementation which we can follow as a model?
In our country, we have the national guideline on the treatment of
acute bacterial rhinosinusitis which was developed by the
multidisciplinary panel and developed as the evidence-based and we
are now conducting the national-wide registry of rhinosinusitis. In
the registry, we will also assess the effectiveness of the
medication, especially antibiotics, according to the guideline in
order to assess the rate of effectiveness in clinical practice. Is it
proper to assess? Do you have any more suggestion?
Thanks for your comment
Best
Sang
> Dear Sang,
> I agree. The evaluation method depends on what we are trying to
> evaluate. I might suggest:
> 1. That CPGs itself should be based on RCTs or (preferbly) systematic
> reviews of RCTs
> 2. Using standard methods for a new CPG doesn't require an RCT. Instead
> we should move into clinical quality improvement mode and do
> appropriate PlanDoStudyAct cycles to monitor and improve how the CPG is
> being used locally. However,
> 3. Using NEW methods to enhance the uptake of CPGs should ideally be
> evaluated using RCTs, so we can learn the impact of this new method,
> Regards
> Paul Glasziou
>
> At 9/03/2003, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>Dear
>> I have questions about the clinical practice guidelines. After
>> completed the development or adopted & adapted the
>>evidence-based clinical practice guideline, is it necessary to
>>assess its effectiveness by conducting a clinical trial? In my
>>opinion, I think there's no necessity. But we should assess the
>>results of the implementation of that guideline, is it true?
>>
>>
>>Best
>>Sang
|