Cargando…

Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for single diseases often pose problems in general practice work with multimorbid patients. However, little research focuses on how general practice is affected by the demand to follow multiple guidelines. This study explored Norwegian general practitioners’ (GPs’) ex...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Austad, Bjarne, Hetlevik, Irene, Mjølstad, Bente Prytz, Helvik, Anne-Sofie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4957916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27449959
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0490-3
_version_ 1782444249846906880
author Austad, Bjarne
Hetlevik, Irene
Mjølstad, Bente Prytz
Helvik, Anne-Sofie
author_facet Austad, Bjarne
Hetlevik, Irene
Mjølstad, Bente Prytz
Helvik, Anne-Sofie
author_sort Austad, Bjarne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for single diseases often pose problems in general practice work with multimorbid patients. However, little research focuses on how general practice is affected by the demand to follow multiple guidelines. This study explored Norwegian general practitioners’ (GPs’) experiences with and reflections upon the consequences for general practice of applying multiple guidelines. METHODS: Qualitative focus group study carried out in Mid-Norway. The study involved a purposeful sample of 25 Norwegian GPs from four pre-existing groups. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using systematic text condensation, i.e. applying a phenomenological approach. RESULTS: The GPs’ responses clustered around two major topics: 1) Complications for the GPs of applying multiple guidelines; and, 2) Complications for their patients when GPs apply multiple guidelines. For the GPs, applying multiple guidelines created a highly problematic situation as they felt obliged to implement guidelines that were not suited to their patients: too often, the map and the terrain did not match. They also experienced greater insecurity regarding their own practice which, they admitted, resulted in an increased tendency to practice ‘defensive medicine’. For their patients, the GPs experienced that applying multiple guidelines increased the risk of polypharmacy, excessive non-pharmacological recommendations, a tendency toward medicalization and, for some, a reduction in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The GPs experienced negative consequences when obliged to apply a variety of single disease guidelines to multimorbid patients, including increased risk of polypharmacy and overtreatment. We believe patient-centered care and the GPs’ courage to non-comply when necessary may aid in reducing these risks. Health care authorities and guideline developers need to be aware of the potential negative effects of applying a single disease focus in general practice, where multimorbidity is highly prevalent.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4957916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49579162016-07-23 Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications Austad, Bjarne Hetlevik, Irene Mjølstad, Bente Prytz Helvik, Anne-Sofie BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for single diseases often pose problems in general practice work with multimorbid patients. However, little research focuses on how general practice is affected by the demand to follow multiple guidelines. This study explored Norwegian general practitioners’ (GPs’) experiences with and reflections upon the consequences for general practice of applying multiple guidelines. METHODS: Qualitative focus group study carried out in Mid-Norway. The study involved a purposeful sample of 25 Norwegian GPs from four pre-existing groups. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using systematic text condensation, i.e. applying a phenomenological approach. RESULTS: The GPs’ responses clustered around two major topics: 1) Complications for the GPs of applying multiple guidelines; and, 2) Complications for their patients when GPs apply multiple guidelines. For the GPs, applying multiple guidelines created a highly problematic situation as they felt obliged to implement guidelines that were not suited to their patients: too often, the map and the terrain did not match. They also experienced greater insecurity regarding their own practice which, they admitted, resulted in an increased tendency to practice ‘defensive medicine’. For their patients, the GPs experienced that applying multiple guidelines increased the risk of polypharmacy, excessive non-pharmacological recommendations, a tendency toward medicalization and, for some, a reduction in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The GPs experienced negative consequences when obliged to apply a variety of single disease guidelines to multimorbid patients, including increased risk of polypharmacy and overtreatment. We believe patient-centered care and the GPs’ courage to non-comply when necessary may aid in reducing these risks. Health care authorities and guideline developers need to be aware of the potential negative effects of applying a single disease focus in general practice, where multimorbidity is highly prevalent. BioMed Central 2016-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4957916/ /pubmed/27449959 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0490-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Austad, Bjarne
Hetlevik, Irene
Mjølstad, Bente Prytz
Helvik, Anne-Sofie
Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
title Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
title_full Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
title_fullStr Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
title_full_unstemmed Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
title_short Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
title_sort applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4957916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27449959
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0490-3
work_keys_str_mv AT austadbjarne applyingclinicalguidelinesingeneralpracticeaqualitativestudyofpotentialcomplications
AT hetlevikirene applyingclinicalguidelinesingeneralpracticeaqualitativestudyofpotentialcomplications
AT mjølstadbenteprytz applyingclinicalguidelinesingeneralpracticeaqualitativestudyofpotentialcomplications
AT helvikannesofie applyingclinicalguidelinesingeneralpracticeaqualitativestudyofpotentialcomplications