The discussion of risk in German surgical clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative review
Author:
McLennan Stuart1, Jansen Carolin2, Buyx Alena1
Affiliation:
1. Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich , Munich , Germany 2. Fachbereich Medizinethik , Institut für Experimentelle Medizin, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel , Kiel , Germany
Abstract
Abstract
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.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Reference22 articles.
1. Ahmad, TBR, Grigoras, I, Aldecoa, C, Hofer, C, Hoeft, A, Holt, P, et al.. Use of failure-to-rescue to identify inter-national variation in postoperative care in low-, middle- and high-income countries: a 7-day cohort study of elective surgery. Br J Anaesth 2017;119:258–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aex185. . 2. Cheng, XQ, Wu, H, Zuo, YM, Mei, B, Zhang, L, Cai, YZ, et al.. Perioperative risk factors and cumulative duration of “triple-low” state associated with worse 30-day mortality of cardiac valvular surgery. J Clin Monit Comput 2017;31:387–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-016-9856-2. 3. Pearse, RM, Moreno, RP, Bauer, P, Pelosi, P, Metnitz, P, Spies, C, et al.. Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet 2012;380:1059–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61148-9. 4. Ghaferi, AA, Birkmeyer, JD, Dimick, JB. Variation in hospital mortality associated with inpa-tient surgery. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1368–75. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa0903048. 5. Nepogodiev, D, Martin, J, Biccard, B, Makupe, A, Bhangu, A, National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery. Global burden of postoperative death. Lancet 2019;393:401. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)33139-8.
|
|