Possibilities for transborder cooperation in breast cancer care in Europe: A comparative analysis regarding the content, quality and evidence use of breast cancer guidelines

被引：10

作者：

Wennekes, L. ^{[1
]}

Hermens, R. P. M. G. ^{[1
]}

van Heumen, K. ^{[4
]}

Runde, V. ^{[3
]}

Schoelen, H. ^{[4
]}

Wollersheim, H. C. H. ^{[1
]}

Grol, R. P. T. M. ^{[1
]}

de Mulder, P. H. M. ^{[2
]}

Ottevanger, P. B.

机构：

[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Ctr Qual Care Res WOK, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands

[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Dept Med Oncol, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands

[3] Wilhelm Anton Hosp Goch, Clin Internal Med, D-47574 Goch, Germany

[4] Wilhelm Anton Hosp Goch, Clin Surg & Obstet, D-47574 Goch, Germany

来源：

BREAST | 2008年 / 17卷 / 05期

关键词：

Breast carcinoma; Practice guidelines; International; Quality assessment; Evidence use; Content analysis;

D O I：

10.1016/j.breast.2008.01.008

中图分类号：

R73 [肿瘤学];

学科分类号：

100214 ;

摘要：

To encourage transborder cooperation in breast cancer care in Europe, we explored possibilities with the German-Dutch border area as an example. Evidence-based breast cancer guidelines were searched and compared on the: (1) methodological quality (with AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation)), (2) content of recommendations and (3) evidence use. The methodological quality of the German (n = 2) and Dutch guidelines (n = 2) was generally sufficient and comparable, although the applicability and the editorial independence were not clearly documented in the Dutch guidelines. Regarding the content analysis. German recommendations were taken as a reference point, because of the highest AGREE scores. Twenty-one of 25 recommendations discussed in both guidelines were corresponding and 4 were different, 32 were not mentioned in the Dutch guideline. The guidelines shared little evidence (<= 11%). We conclude that there are possibilities to encourage transborder cooperation. The clinical context of our results should be examined by measuring the actual care in both countries preferably with quality indicators. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

引用

页码：464 / 471

页数：8

共 29 条

[1] Practice guidelines for the detection and management of thyroid dysfunction. A comparative review of the recommendations [J].

Arbelle, JE ;

Porath, A .

CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY, 1999, 51 (01) :11-18

[2]

*AWMF, 2004, DIAGN THER NACHS MAM

[3] Inside guidelines - Comparative analysis of recommendations and evidence in diabetes guide [J].

Burgers, JS ;

Bailey, JV ;

Klazinga, NS ;

Van der Bij, AK ;

Grol, R ;

Feder, G .

DIABETES CARE, 2002, 25 (11) :1933-1939

[4] Defining quality of care [J].

Campbell, SM ;

Roland, MO ;

Buetow, SA .

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2000, 51 (11) :1611-1625

[5]

Christiaens T, 2004, SCAND J PRIM HEALTH, V22, P141, DOI 10.1080/02813430410006521

[6]

Cluzeau F, 2003, QUAL SAF HEALTH CARE, V12, P18

[7]

Cruse H, 2002, BMC HEALTH SERV RES, V2, DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-2-1

[8]

*CTR EV BAS MED, 2001, LEV EV GRAD REC

[9]

*DTSCH GES SEN, 2003, BRUSTKR FRUH DEUTSCH

[10] Cultural basis for differences between US and French clinical recommendations for women at increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer [J].

Eisinger, F ;

Geller, G ;

Burke, W ;

Holtzman, NA .

LANCET, 1999, 353 (9156) :919-920

← 1 2 3 →