Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 8746279

Clinical guidelines and their implementation.

Abstract

Within the UK there has been increasing interest in the development and implementation of guidelines, as the emphasis on clinical effectiveness is gathering momentum. This paper outlines some of the practical issues encountered in developing and implementing guidelines, based on experiences within Liverpool. Developing local guidelines can be a lengthy process, but that process is not a waste of time if it means there is more likely to be compliance in the end. Dissemination of guidelines alone is not enough; it needs to be combined with an appropriate implementation strategy. There is a danger of primary care being overloaded with new guidelines; there needs to be a timed strategy for their introduction. More imaginative thought needs to be put into the marketing of new ideas in order to change practice. We need to encourage the ethos amongst healthcare professionals of expecting to have to constantly update knowledge and practice.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D Forrest, A Hoskins, R Hussey. 1996. Clinical guidelines and their implementation.. https://doi.org/10.1136/pgmj.72.843.19

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗