Cargando…

The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have a potentially important role regarding the assessment and communication of the risks of perioperative complications. This study aimed to (1) examine the content of German surgical CPGs in relation to surgical risks and (2) provide baseline results...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McLennan, Stuart, Jansen, Carolin, Buyx, Alena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: De Gruyter 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8435268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34589572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iss-2020-0026
_version_ 1783751757479804928
author McLennan, Stuart
Jansen, Carolin
Buyx, Alena
author_facet McLennan, Stuart
Jansen, Carolin
Buyx, Alena
author_sort McLennan, Stuart
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have a potentially important role regarding the assessment and communication of the risks of perioperative complications. This study aimed to (1) examine the content of German surgical CPGs in relation to surgical risks and (2) provide baseline results for future research in order to assess the development of surgical CPGs in Germany in relation to this issue. METHODS: In November 2015, all German surgical CPGs that provide guidance regarding illnesses that can be treated with a surgical procedure were collected from the websites of the German umbrella organisation of medical professional associations and the German Association for Cardiology. RESULTS: Data collection retrieved 230 CPGs of which 214 were included in the final analysis. The analysis identified four different groups: 1) 5% (10/214) of guidelines did not discuss “risks” or “complications” at all; 2) 21% (44/214) of guidelines discussed general risks that are not related to surgical complications; 3) 35% (76/214) of guidelines discussed surgical complications and often discussed their likelihood in terms of “high risk” or “low risk”, but did not provide numeric estimates and 4) 39% (84/214) of guidelines discussed specific surgical risks and also provided numerical risk estimates. Guidelines with higher methodological quality more frequently included numerical risk estimates. CONCLUSIONS: It is positive that the vast majority of German surgical CPGs address the issue of risks. However, it would be helpful if more German surgical CPGs provide explicit and evidence-based estimates and recommendations relating to the surgical risk to support surgeons in providing high-quality care and to meet their ethical obligations to patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8435268
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher De Gruyter
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84352682021-09-28 The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review McLennan, Stuart Jansen, Carolin Buyx, Alena Innov Surg Sci Original Article OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have a potentially important role regarding the assessment and communication of the risks of perioperative complications. This study aimed to (1) examine the content of German surgical CPGs in relation to surgical risks and (2) provide baseline results for future research in order to assess the development of surgical CPGs in Germany in relation to this issue. METHODS: In November 2015, all German surgical CPGs that provide guidance regarding illnesses that can be treated with a surgical procedure were collected from the websites of the German umbrella organisation of medical professional associations and the German Association for Cardiology. RESULTS: Data collection retrieved 230 CPGs of which 214 were included in the final analysis. The analysis identified four different groups: 1) 5% (10/214) of guidelines did not discuss “risks” or “complications” at all; 2) 21% (44/214) of guidelines discussed general risks that are not related to surgical complications; 3) 35% (76/214) of guidelines discussed surgical complications and often discussed their likelihood in terms of “high risk” or “low risk”, but did not provide numeric estimates and 4) 39% (84/214) of guidelines discussed specific surgical risks and also provided numerical risk estimates. Guidelines with higher methodological quality more frequently included numerical risk estimates. CONCLUSIONS: It is positive that the vast majority of German surgical CPGs address the issue of risks. However, it would be helpful if more German surgical CPGs provide explicit and evidence-based estimates and recommendations relating to the surgical risk to support surgeons in providing high-quality care and to meet their ethical obligations to patients. De Gruyter 2021-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8435268/ /pubmed/34589572 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iss-2020-0026 Text en © 2021 Stuart McLennan et al., published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Original Article
McLennan, Stuart
Jansen, Carolin
Buyx, Alena
The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
title The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
title_full The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
title_fullStr The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
title_full_unstemmed The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
title_short The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
title_sort discussion of risk in german surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8435268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34589572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iss-2020-0026
work_keys_str_mv AT mclennanstuart thediscussionofriskingermansurgicalclinicalpracticeguidelinesaqualitativereview
AT jansencarolin thediscussionofriskingermansurgicalclinicalpracticeguidelinesaqualitativereview
AT buyxalena thediscussionofriskingermansurgicalclinicalpracticeguidelinesaqualitativereview
AT mclennanstuart discussionofriskingermansurgicalclinicalpracticeguidelinesaqualitativereview
AT jansencarolin discussionofriskingermansurgicalclinicalpracticeguidelinesaqualitativereview
AT buyxalena discussionofriskingermansurgicalclinicalpracticeguidelinesaqualitativereview