Cargando…
Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice
BACKGROUND: Initiatives such as “Choosing Wisely” in the USA and “Smarter Medicine” in Switzerland have published lists of widely overused health care services. The German initiative “Choosing Wisely Together (Gemeinsam Klug Entscheiden)” follows this example. The goal of our study was to prioritize...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6180663/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30305090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3569-9 |
_version_ | 1783362253497565184 |
---|---|
author | Muche-Borowski, Cathleen Abiry, Dorit Wagner, Hans-Otto Barzel, Anne Lühmann, Dagmar Egidi, Günther Kühlein, Thomas Scherer, Martin |
author_facet | Muche-Borowski, Cathleen Abiry, Dorit Wagner, Hans-Otto Barzel, Anne Lühmann, Dagmar Egidi, Günther Kühlein, Thomas Scherer, Martin |
author_sort | Muche-Borowski, Cathleen |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Initiatives such as “Choosing Wisely” in the USA and “Smarter Medicine” in Switzerland have published lists of widely overused health care services. The German initiative “Choosing Wisely Together (Gemeinsam Klug Entscheiden)” follows this example. The goal of our study was to prioritize important recommendations against the overuse and underuse of health care services. The final list of recommendations will be published in the German guideline “Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care”. METHODS: First, a multidisciplinary expert panel established a catalogue of prioritization criteria. Second, we extracted all the recommendations from evidence- and consensus-based German College of General Practice and Family Medicine (DEGAM) guidelines and National Health Care Guidelines (NVL). Third, the recommendations were rated by two independent panels (general practitioners and other health care professionals involved/not involved in guideline development). The prioritization process was finalized in a consensus conference held by DEGAM’s Standing Guideline Committee (SLK). RESULTS: Eleven prioritization criteria were established. A total of 782 recommendations were extracted and rated by 98 physicians and other health care professionals in a survey. In the voting process, more than 80% of the recommendations were eliminated. After the final consensus conference, twelve recommendations from DEGAM guidelines, nine DEGAM addenda and 17 NVL recommendations were chosen for inclusion in the guideline, for a total of 38 recommendations. CONCLUSION: The selection procedure proved helpful in identifying the highest priority recommendations with which to combat the overuse and underuse of health care services. To date, in Germany there has been no attempt to compile such a list by using a systematic and transparent methodology. Hence, the guideline that results from this process can fill an important gap. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6180663 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61806632018-10-18 Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice Muche-Borowski, Cathleen Abiry, Dorit Wagner, Hans-Otto Barzel, Anne Lühmann, Dagmar Egidi, Günther Kühlein, Thomas Scherer, Martin BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Initiatives such as “Choosing Wisely” in the USA and “Smarter Medicine” in Switzerland have published lists of widely overused health care services. The German initiative “Choosing Wisely Together (Gemeinsam Klug Entscheiden)” follows this example. The goal of our study was to prioritize important recommendations against the overuse and underuse of health care services. The final list of recommendations will be published in the German guideline “Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care”. METHODS: First, a multidisciplinary expert panel established a catalogue of prioritization criteria. Second, we extracted all the recommendations from evidence- and consensus-based German College of General Practice and Family Medicine (DEGAM) guidelines and National Health Care Guidelines (NVL). Third, the recommendations were rated by two independent panels (general practitioners and other health care professionals involved/not involved in guideline development). The prioritization process was finalized in a consensus conference held by DEGAM’s Standing Guideline Committee (SLK). RESULTS: Eleven prioritization criteria were established. A total of 782 recommendations were extracted and rated by 98 physicians and other health care professionals in a survey. In the voting process, more than 80% of the recommendations were eliminated. After the final consensus conference, twelve recommendations from DEGAM guidelines, nine DEGAM addenda and 17 NVL recommendations were chosen for inclusion in the guideline, for a total of 38 recommendations. CONCLUSION: The selection procedure proved helpful in identifying the highest priority recommendations with which to combat the overuse and underuse of health care services. To date, in Germany there has been no attempt to compile such a list by using a systematic and transparent methodology. Hence, the guideline that results from this process can fill an important gap. BioMed Central 2018-10-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6180663/ /pubmed/30305090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3569-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This 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 Muche-Borowski, Cathleen Abiry, Dorit Wagner, Hans-Otto Barzel, Anne Lühmann, Dagmar Egidi, Günther Kühlein, Thomas Scherer, Martin Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
title | Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
title_full | Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
title_fullStr | Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
title_full_unstemmed | Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
title_short | Protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
title_sort | protection against the overuse and underuse of health care – methodological considerations for establishing prioritization criteria and recommendations in general practice |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6180663/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30305090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3569-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mucheborowskicathleen protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT abirydorit protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT wagnerhansotto protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT barzelanne protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT luhmanndagmar protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT egidigunther protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT kuhleinthomas protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice AT scherermartin protectionagainsttheoveruseandunderuseofhealthcaremethodologicalconsiderationsforestablishingprioritizationcriteriaandrecommendationsingeneralpractice |