Cargando…

Improving guideline adherence for cardiac rehabilitation in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: In 2004, the Netherlands Society of Cardiology released the current guideline on cardiac rehabilitation. Given its complexity and the involvement of various healthcare disciplines, it was supplemented with a clinical algorithm, serving to facilitate its implementation in daily practice....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kemps, H. M. C., van Engen-Verheul, M. M., Kraaijenhagen, R. A., Goud, R., Hellemans, I. M., van Exel, H. J., Sunamura, M., Peters, R. J., Peek, N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21487752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-011-0104-6
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In 2004, the Netherlands Society of Cardiology released the current guideline on cardiac rehabilitation. Given its complexity and the involvement of various healthcare disciplines, it was supplemented with a clinical algorithm, serving to facilitate its implementation in daily practice. Although the algorithm was shown to be effective for improving guideline adherence, several shortcomings and deficiencies were revealed. Based on these findings, the clinical algorithm has now been updated. This article describes the process and the changes that were made. METHODS: The revision consisted of three phases. First, the reliability of the measurement instruments included in the 2004 Clinical Algorithm was investigated by evaluating between-centre variations of the baseline assessment data. Second, based on the available evidence, a multidisciplinary expert advisory panel selected items needing revision and provided specific recommendations. Third, a guideline development group decided which revisions were finally included, also taking practical considerations into account. RESULTS: A total of nine items were revised: three because of new scientific insights and six because of the need for more objective measurement instruments. In all revised items, subjective assessment methods were replaced by more objective assessment tools (e.g. symptom-limited exercise instead of clinical judgement). In addition, four new key items were added: screening for anxiety/depression, stress, cardiovascular risk profile and alcohol consumption. CONCLUSION: Based on previously determined shortcomings, the Clinical Algorithm for Cardiac Rehabilitation was thoroughly revised mainly by incorporating more objective assessment methods and by adding several new key areas.