The impact of practice guidelines in the management of Barrett esophagus -A national prospective cohort study of physicians

Citation
M. Cruz-correa et al., The impact of practice guidelines in the management of Barrett esophagus -A national prospective cohort study of physicians, ARCH IN MED, 161(21), 2001, pp. 2588-2595
Citations number
41
Categorie Soggetti
General & Internal Medicine","Medical Research General Topics
Journal title
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
ISSN journal
00039926 → ACNP
Volume
161
Issue
21
Year of publication
2001
Pages
2588 - 2595
Database
ISI
SICI code
0003-9926(20011126)161:21<2588:TIOPGI>2.0.ZU;2-X
Abstract
Background: Surveillance of patients with Barrett esophagus (BE) is recomme nded to detect dysplasia and early cancer. In 1998, practice guidelines for the surveillance of patients with BE were developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG). Our objective is to assess physicians' awareness of agreement with and adherence to these guidelines. Methods: A national prospective cohort study of practicing gastroenterologi sts who completed a self-administered questionnaire containing case studies prior to the release of the guidelines and another survey 18 months later. Analysis of adherence to the guidelines was done using the McNemar chi (2) test. Results: Of the 154 gastroenterologists (66%) who responded to the follow-u p survey, more than half (55%) were aware of the guidelines, and members of the ACG were more likely to know of their existence than nonmembers (61% v s 38%; P=.01). Overall, about 27% of physicians reported practicing in acco rdance with the guidelines at baseline; adherence increased modestly to 38% in the 18-month follow-up (P=.04) and was inversely related to fee-for-ser vice reimbursement. Awareness was not associated with an increased likeliho od of adherence, but agreement with the guidelines was strongly correlated with adherence (P < .001). The most frequent reasons for disagreement were concerns about liability, cancer risk, and inadequate evidence. Conclusions: Awareness of the guidelines published by the ACG was low. Guid eline awareness did not predict adherence. Improvement in guideline adheren ce will require steps beyond mere dissemination and promotion. Addressing d isagreements about liability, disease risk, and scientific evidence as well as restructuring payment incentives may help achieve optimal practice.