Implementing NICE guidelines: the difficulties

Emerald - Tập 12 Số 4 - Trang 267-269 - 2007
AbhijitBasu1, AmandaBellis1
1Royal Albert Edward Infirmary, Wigan and Leigh NHS Trust, Wigan, UK

Tóm tắt

PurposeThis purpose of this study is to look at the availability of routine antenatal anti‐D prophylaxis (RAADP) in the maternity units within the North‐west Deanery, England five years after the publication of this technology appraisal guideline (no. 41) by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE).Design/methodology/approachAntenatal clinics of all the major 18 maternity hospitals were contacted about their existing practice on RAADP. Responses were obtained by facsimile and telephone.FindingsA total of 11 of the 18 units had implemented the practice between April 2003 and May 2007. Some had changed their practice from two doses to a single dose on the grounds of logistics. Cost appeared to be the most important reason in non‐user units. The practice is under consideration in two units.Practical implicationsThere may be difficulty in universal implementation of NICE guidelines despite the supporting evidence.Originality/valueThis study demonstrates the issue of difficulty of local health economies in supporting national guidelines.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Birch, S. and Gafni, A. (2004), “The “NICE” approach to technology assessment: an economics perspective”, Health Care Management Science, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 35‐41.

Department of Health (1998), A First Class Service: Quality in the New NHS, HMSO, London.

Mason, G. and Glanville, T. (2002), “Guidelines for antenatal anti‐D prophylaxis”, The Lancet, Vol. 360, p. 880.

NICE (2002), “Guidance on the use of routine antennal anti‐D prophylaxis for Rh‐D negative women”, Technology Appraisal Guidance, No. 41, NICE, London.

Samanta, A. and Samanta, J. (2005), “Evidence based medicine: a clinical governance tool for rationalising or rationing health care?”, Clinical Governance: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 308‐13.

Tan, K.B.H. (2006), “Clinical practice guidelines: a critical review”, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 195‐220.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Emerald

Tập 12 Số 4

267-269

Thông tin tác giả