Aps. Hungin et al., GUIDELINES FOR DYSPEPSIA MANAGEMENT IN GENERAL-PRACTICE USING FOCUS GROUPS, British journal of general practice, 47(418), 1997, pp. 275-279
Background. There is a paucity of published guidelines on managing dys
pepsia in general practice. Existing guidelines emphasize the role of
investigations and drugs rather than management approaches. Focus grou
ps are a means of uncovering the way in which the participants think a
nd work in the pragmatic setting, and have not previously been formall
y used in creating guidelines. Aim. To develop guidelines for the mana
gement of dyspepsia and to assess the use of focus groups of general p
ractitioners (GPs) in order to do so. Method. Initial evidence-based g
uidelines were proposed by a group of four GPs with an audit facilitat
or, and used for discussion in three focus groups using a standard for
mat. An anthropological analysis of the proceedings led to modificatio
ns of the original guidelines, based on knowledge, perceptions and att
itudes. The study was set in three distinct locations involving 30 GPs
. The outcome measures consisted of feedback, categorized by types of
responses, from the analysis of the focus groups and the creation of g
uidelines. Results. The resulting guidelines were patient centred and
based on the principles of good consultation. They encompassed patient
s' fears and doctors' clinical uncertainties, and allowed flexibility
in the individual patient's manage ment. The focus group methodology e
xposed a substantial number of GPs to guideline development, and had;h
e added benefits of dissemination, peer review and educational challen
ge. Conclusion. It was possible to develop guidelines for dyspepsia us
ing focus groups. The methodology had the added benefits of ownership,
peer review, exposure of educational gaps and locality factors, and d
issemination of good practice. It included steps from evidence review
to implementation strategies. The development of this technique could
lead to a strategy towards the creation and application of evidence-ba
sed and professionally acceptable clinical guidelines and practice on
a locality basis nationally.