Clinical guidelines and the law: advice, guidance or regulation?

Standard of anesthesia care: possible dissociation from recommendations made by clinical practice guidelines

A medical malpractice lawsuit may be brought against health care providers, if there was a possibility of a negligence, or failure to meet the standard of care. Recently, clinical practice guidelines have increasingly been used as evidence of the standard of care. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether these guidelines can be used as evidence of the standard of care. We carried out a snapshot study to know whether or not there were dissociations between the current standard of anesthesia care and recommendations made by clinical practice guidelines. We asked all the 80 heads of Anesthesiology departments of Japanese public and private Universities, to answer questions related to difficult airway management after induction of anesthesia, postoperative monitoring of breathing, and of the presence or the absence of neuropathy of the lower legs after regional anesthesia. The response rate was 71% (57/80). The majority of anesthesiologists had little experience with front-of-neck access in patient, and responders might frequently make repeated attempts at tracheal intubation. Postoperative monitoring was frequently not routinely performed. In conclusion, this study has shown that there may be various degrees of dissociations between the current standard of anesthesia care and the recommendations made by clinical practice guidelines that had been used as evidence of the standard of care in medical malpractice lawsuit cases in Japan.

Differentiating Psychosomatic, Somatopsychic, Multisystem Illnesses, and Medical Uncertainty

There is often difficulty differentiating between psychosomatic, somatopsychic, multisystem illness, and different degrees of medical uncertainty. Uncommon, complex, and multisystem diseases are commonly misdiagnosed. Two case histories are described, and relevant terms differentiating psychosomatic, somatopsychic, and multisystem illnesses are identified, reviewed, and discussed. Adequate differentiation requires an understanding of the mind/body connection, which includes knowledge of general medicine, psychiatry, and the systems linking the body and the brain. A psychiatric diagnosis cannot be given solely based upon the absence of physical, laboratory, or pathological findings. Medically unexplained symptoms, somatoform disorder, and compensation neurosis are outdated and/or inaccurate terms. The terms subjective, nonspecific, and vague can be used inaccurately. Conversion disorders, functional disorders, psychogenic illness, factitious disorder imposed upon another (Munchausen's syndrome by proxy), somatic symptom disorder, psychogenic seizures, psychogenic pain, psychogenic fatigue, and delusional parasitosis can be over-diagnosed. Bodily distress disorder and bodily distress syndrome are scientifically unsupported and inaccurate. Many "all in your head" conditions may be related to the microbiome and the immune system. Better education concerning the interface between medicine and psychiatry and the associated diagnostic nomenclature as well as utilizing clinical judgment and thorough assessment, exercising humility, and maintaining our roots in traditional medicine will help to improve diagnostic accuracy and patient trust.

Clinical practice guidelines and practice parameters for the child neurologist

Guidance about how to practice child neurology has been around for decades. Recently, however, clinical practice guidelines, practice parameters, and standardized clinical assessment and management plans are gaining increasing attention. This overview, written for child neurologists, addresses such issues as the following: what are clinical practice guidelines, why are they needed, how are they created, how should they be created, how well are they accepted and adhered to, what influences acceptance and adherence, do guidelines improve care, do they reduce costs, will they be viewed by courts as the standard of care, how can they be updated and improved, and are there better alternatives?

Clinical guidelines in dentistry: their benefits, limitations and dentolegal implications

This paper examines and reviews the benefits, limitations and legal implications of guidelines formulated specifically for general dental practitioners. As more guidelines are developed and become more influential in the way dentists practise and become more accountable, it is of paramount importance that that they are scientifically valid, relevant to the practitioners who use them, and are rigorously evaluated before adoption.

Safe Criteria and Procedure for Kangaroo Care With Intubated Preterm Infants

Kangaroo care (KC) was safely conducted with mechanically ventilated infants who weighed less than 600 grams and were less than 26 weeks gestation at birth. These infants, ventilated for at least 24 hours at the time of the first KC session, were considered stable on the ventilator at low settings (intermittent mandatory ventilation < 35 breaths per minute and FiO2 < 50%), had stable vital signs, and were not on vasopressors. A protocol for implementation of KC with ventilated infants that uses a standing transfer, with two staff members assisting to minimize the possibility of extubation, is presented. Also discussed is the positioning of the ventilator tubing during KC. This protocol was implemented without any accidental extubation throughout an experimental research study. The criteria and protocol were compared to those available in published reports and revealed many similar elements, providing additional support for the recommended protocol. No adverse events occurred with the criteria and protocol reported here, suggesting that they can be adopted for broader use.

Lying in the bed we've made: reflection on some unintended consequences of clinical practice guidelines in the courts

Evidence on the use of clinical practice guidelines to aid in the legal determination of negligence is increasing, specifically where they affect determinations of the standard of care and causation. So too is evidence that some clinical practice guidelines are of poor quality. An action alleging the negligent failure to diagnose and treat gestational diabetes in 1988, in which the neonate suffered permanent brachial plexus injury, entered into evidence a 1984 clinical practice guideline authored by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. No "experts" were called to adjudicate the quality of this guideline, which cited no evidence or rationale in support of its recommendations. The standard as laid out in the guideline was judged by the court to reflect a prevailing standard of care, and a finding of negligence was rendered. As the courts pay increased attention to clinical practice guidelines, critical appraisal by the professional organizations developing these documents must occur to assure methodological rigour. Further, the quality of clinical practice guidelines should receive critical scrutiny by the courts if they are to be relied upon, even partially, to assist with legal determinations of the standard of care or issues under causation.

Clinical standards for inpatient specialist rehabilitation services in the UK

OBJECTIVE

To develop a set of clinical standards for specialist inpatient rehabilitation services in the UK and to undertake a preliminary survey of consultants who provide those services.

DESIGN

The proposed set of standards was developed by group consensus followed by an iterative consultation process. A postal survey was conducted on behalf of the British Society for Rehabilitation Medicine (BSRM) amongst its consultant members in the UK (n = 163), who were asked to assess their services in relation to these standards, and to comment on the standards themselves, their usefulness and applicability.

RESULTS

The response rate was 61%, of which 81 respondents ran an inpatient rehabilitation service. Overall, the standards appeared to be acceptable to most, and mainly struck the right level, being attained by the majority of services. Specific suggestions were incorporated into the revised standards. Further work is required to establish agreed outcomes that are systematically measured and recorded: only half the respondents (50%) routinely recorded a standardized outcome measure, and only a quarter (26%) routinely reviewed patients to record long-term outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical standards have been developed for specialist inpatient rehabilitation services in the UK. The BSRM proposes to adopt these standards for a test period of 2-3 years in the first instance. It is likely that they will require further refinement with time, and modification is required to adapt them to different subspecialities and settings.

Pressure sore treatment: Clinical guidelines

Clinical guidelines, like any intervention, can and should be appraised systematically. Evaluation is essential since an intervention that appears as if it will improve care may not do so in practice. Furthermore, guidelines rely on a change in behaviour on the part of practitioners and failure to achieve this may undermine potential health gains. The key areas considered here are evaluation of guidelines themselves and assessment of their impact on care.

Evidence-based practice in primary care: past, present and future

As in other health care specialities, evidence-based practice is beginning to have an impact on the philosophy and workings of primary care. Some practising clinicians, however, may wish to question its relevance to their everyday work, and whether general practitioners and other members of the primary health care team can realistically adopt a new approach to clinical decision making, at a time of such high workload and competing priorities. Major changes have taken place during the last 20 years as a result of the National Health Service (NHS) reforms, the development of general practice and primary care research, and other health service innovations such as the introduction of new technologies, which have had an important impact on primary care. Issues such as the availability and use of different research methods, the role of experts, and the development of guidelines, audit and evaluation of care, are becoming subject to renewed scrutiny. Within this context, this article explores the potential of an evidence-based approach in the primary care setting, and discusses possible strategies for change to assist the dissemination of research into practice and the implementation of evidence-based health care.

Central dimensions of clinical practice evaluation: efficiency, appropriateness and effectiveness--II

That a treatment selected for a given condition works, or that it works better than alternative treatments, or that it was selected because it works as well as but is cheaper than alternative treatments, should be of pivotal concern to clinicians and is of central concern to patients and to health care managers. Attempts to address these concerns have resulted in what is now widely termed the 'effectiveness movement'. The protagonists of the movement have been concerned to create a culture of evaluation and inquiry within which the formulation of evidence-based clinical guidelines and their introduction into routine practice have played a prominent part. The need to ensure cost effectiveness of clinical intervention has been at least as emphasized as the need to ensure the clinical effectiveness of health care interventions. Although cost-effectiveness analyses are now an indispensable feature of practice guideline formulation and treatment evaluation, few studies have examined any deterioration in patient outcome associated with successful cost containment. An adequate understanding of the concept of clinical effectiveness and the associated aims of the 'effectiveness movement' is central to an understanding of the future nature and extent of health service provision, not simply in the UK but also internationally. Having examined the concepts of efficiency and appropriateness previously (O'Neill, Miles & Polychronis 1996, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2, 13-27) we move in this second of two articles to a detailed explanation of the concept of effectiveness, and to an examination of the derivation and use of clinical practice guideline, concluding with a consideration of the role of practice guidelines in ensuring the cost effectiveness of health care intervention. The reservation is expressed that a 'guidelines culture', when established, will be manipulated by health care commissioners for largely political purposes, creating a systematic bias in the purchasing process that will actively disadvantage a range of patient groups.