Endorsement of clinical practice guidelines: Criteria from the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To refine the process for endorsement of guidelines and establish the expectations of the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) regarding the quality and relevance of clinical practice guidelines targeting family physicians and their patients. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE: Initially, a group of 6 CFPC staff and selected College members reviewed the previous process for endorsement with the aim of providing a new direction, if needed. The work was then assumed by the Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group, a purposefully selected group of 9 family physicians from across Canada with expertise in research, evidence, guidelines, knowledge translation, and continuing professional development and education. METHODS: The initial task force reviewed the endorsement process and identified areas for improvement. A draft new process and core criteria for high-quality guidelines were developed. This was approved by the CFPC board. A Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group was then formed to further refine the process and the criteria. Multiple resources were used to inform the criteria. The Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group will manage the endorsement process of external submitted guidelines, as well as provide high-level guidance to the CFPC regarding in-house guidelines and continuing professional development content. REPORT: This article provides the expectations of the CFPC regarding clinical practice guidelines and describes in detail the process and criteria for endorsement. Key principles include family physician involvement and guideline funding unlikely to introduce bias, with most criteria falling under 4 themed areas: relation to family medicine, CFPC values, patient engagement and decision making, and scientific rigour. The Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group will report to the CFPC board at least once a year. It is hoped that this fully transparent process and these criteria will help advance the quality and standards of clinical practice guideline production in Canada. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive but reasonable list has been provided that reflects the best standards and recommendations and is consistent with the CFPC's values while recognizing the landscape of guideline development for its national partners and colleagues. As with all processes, careful consideration and evaluation will be essential.

How do family physicians measure blood pressure in routine clinical practice? National survey of Canadian family physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the techniques currently used by family physicians in Canada to measure blood pressure (BP) for screening for, diagnosing, and treating hypertension. DESIGN: A Web-based cross-sectional survey distributed by e-mail. SETTING: Stratified random sample of family physicians in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Family physician members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada with valid e-mail addresses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians' self-reported routine methods for recording BP in their practices to screen for, diagnose, and manage hypertension. RESULTS: A total of 774 valid responses were received, for a response rate of 16.2%. Respondents were similar to nonrespondents except for underrepresentation of male physicians. Of 769 respondents, 417 (54.2%) indicated that they used manual office BP measurement with a mercury or aneroid device and stethoscope as the routine method to screen patients for high BP, while 42.9% (330 of 769) reported using automated office BP (AOBP) measurement. The method most frequently used to make a diagnosis of hypertension was AOBP measurement (31.1%, 240 of 771), followed by home BP measurement (22.4%, 173 of 771) and manual office BP measurement (21.4%, 165 of 771). Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) was used for diagnosis by 14.4% (111 of 771) of respondents. The most frequently reported method for ongoing management was home BP monitoring (68.7%, 528 of 769), followed by manual office BP measurement (63.6%, 489 of 769) and AOBP measurement (59.2%, 455 of 769). More than three-quarters (77.8%, 598 of 769) of respondents indicated that ABPM was readily available for their patients. CONCLUSION: Canadian family physicians exhibit overall high use of electronic devices for BP measurement, However, more efforts are needed to encourage practitioners to follow current Canadian guidelines, which advocate the use of AOBP measurement for hypertension screening, ABPM and home BP measurement for making a diagnosis, and both AOBP and home BP monitoring for ongoing management.

Validation des lignes directrices de pratique clinique: Critères du Collège des médecins de famille du Canada.

OBJECTIF: Parfaire le processus de validation des lignes directrices et établir les attentes du Collège des médecins de famille du Canada (CMFC) quant à la qualité et à la pertinence des lignes directrices de pratique clinique à l'intention des médecins de famille et de leurs patients. COMPOSITION DU COMITÉ: Au départ, un groupe de 6 personnes, employés et membres choisis du CMFC, ont révisé le précédent processus de validation dans le but de lui donner une nouvelle orientation, au besoin. Le Groupe de travail d'experts sur les lignes directrices et le transfert des connaissances a ensuite pris le relais; ce groupe est composé de 9 médecins de famille sélectionnés avec soin partout au Canada qui sont expérimentés dans les domaines de la recherche, des données probantes, des lignes directrices, du transfert des connaissances, ainsi que du perfectionnement professionnel continu et de l'éducation. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Le groupe de travail initial s'est penché sur le processus de validation et a relevé les domaines pouvant être améliorés. L'ébauche d'un nouveau processus et de critères fondamentaux pour des lignes directrices de bonne qualité a été rédigée et approuvée par le Conseil d'administration du CMFC. Un Groupe de travail d'experts sur les lignes directrices et le transfert des connaissances a ensuite été formé pour peaufiner davantage le processus et les critères. Les critères s'appuient sur plusieurs ressources. Le Groupe de travail d'experts sur les lignes directrices et le transfert des connaissances aura la responsabilité de gérer le processus de validation des lignes directrices externes soumises, ainsi que de fournir au CMFC des conseils de haut niveau sur les lignes directrices internes et le contenu du perfectionnement professionnel continu. RAPPORT: Cet article présente les attentes du CMFC en matière de lignes directrices de pratique clinique, et décrit en détail le processus et les critères de validation. Les principes fondamentaux sont la participation des médecins de famille et le financement des lignes directrices qui est peu susceptible d'introduire un biais, et la plupart des critères s'inscrivent sous 4 thèmes : la relation avec la médecine familiale; les valeurs du CMFC; l'engagement et la prise de décision des patients; et la rigueur scientifique. Le Groupe de travail d'experts sur les lignes directrices et le transfert des connaissances présentera ses résultats au Conseil d'administration du CMFC au moins une fois l'an. L'on souhaite que ce processus complètement transparent et ces critères fassent progresser la qualité et les normes qui régissent la production des lignes directrices de pratique clinique au Canada. CONCLUSION: Une liste exhaustive, mais raisonnable, reflète les meilleures normes et recommandations, et respecte les valeurs du CMFC tout en reconnaissant le contexte de rédaction des lignes directrices pour ses partenaires et ses collègues à l'échelle nationale. Comme c'est le cas pour tous les processus, l'examen et l'évaluation approfondis seront essentiels.