A systematic review of standard treatment guidelines in India

被引:4
|
作者
Koli, Paresh Girdharlal [1 ,2 ]
Kshirsagar, Nilima A. [3 ]
Shetty, Yashashri C. [1 ,2 ]
Mehta, Dhvani [4 ]
Mittal, Yashaswini [4 ]
Parmar, Urwashi [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Med Coll, Dept Pharmacol & Therapeut, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
[2] King Edward Mem Hosp, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
[3] Indian Council Med Res, Natl Chair Clin Pharmacol, New Delhi, India
[4] Vidhi Ctr Legal Policy, New Delhi, India
关键词
Evidence-based guidelines; rational use of medicines; STGs therapeutic guidelines; treatment guidelines; CLINICAL-PRACTICE; CONSENSUS STATEMENT; MANAGEMENT; DIAGNOSIS; ACADEMY; LEGAL;
D O I
10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_902_17
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background & objectives: Standard treatment guidelines (STGs) are the cornerstone to therapeutics. Multiple agencies in India develop STGs. This systematic review was conducted to find out STGs available in India, evaluate if these were as per World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for STGs and compare these with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. Information on legal authority and responsibility for formulating STGs was also sought. Methods: PRISMA guidelines were followed. Publications from PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for STGs using terms 'Standard Treatment Guidelines AND India'. Data from STGs were compiled in excel as per the WHO and authors' criteria for STGs and compared with NICE guidelines. Results: PubMed and Google Scholar search provided 56 publications (out of 1695 search results) mentioning 27 STGs. Google search and replies from authors led us 36 STGs, totalling to 63 STGs. No STG mentioned any specific period of revision, eight STGs were not evidence-based, 55 had some Indian references, 48 STGs were for single disease and the remaining multi-disease, three STGs did not include diagnostic criteria, 16 STGs did not give prescribing information of recommended treatment and 16 STGs provide no referral criteria for patients. Fifty live STGs did not mention level of health care. While NICE is a single legal authority in England and guidelines are as per WHO recommendations for STGs, in India although Acts and rules do not vest authority, National Health Systems Resource Center is generally designated responsible for STGs. Interpretation & conclusions: In India, although there are multiple STGs developed by various authorities and professionals for the same conditions, these fulfil WHO recommendations only partially. Authority with statutory duty collaborating with professional organizations, a standard methodology for adopting international guidelines, Indian data for evidence base, attention to local needs will help in delveloping better STGs and their acceptance.
引用
收藏
页码:715 / 729
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Systematic review of recent dementia practice guidelines
    Ngo, Jennifer
    Holroyd-Leduc, Jayna M.
    AGE AND AGEING, 2015, 44 (01) : 25 - 33
  • [2] A systematic review of treatment guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer
    Edwards, M. S.
    Chadda, S. D.
    Zhao, Z.
    Barber, B. L.
    Sykes, D. P.
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2012, 14 (02) : e31 - e47
  • [3] The definition, screening, and treatment of postpartum anemia: A systematic review of guidelines
    Ruiz de Vinaspre-Hernandez, Regina
    Gea-Caballero, Vicente
    Juarez-Vela, Raul
    Iruzubieta-Barragan, Francisco Javier
    BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE, 2021, 48 (01): : 14 - 25
  • [4] Systematic review of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection
    Gu, Ting
    Li, Wen
    Yang, Li-Li
    Yang, Si-Min
    He, Qian
    He, Hai-Yu
    Sun, Da-Li
    FRONTIERS IN CELLULAR AND INFECTION MICROBIOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [5] Outcomes of deviation from treatment guidelines in status epilepticus: A systematic review
    Uppal, Preena
    Cardamone, Michael
    Lawson, John A.
    SEIZURE-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPILEPSY, 2018, 58 : 147 - 153
  • [6] Guidelines for the treatment of dysentery (shigellosis): a systematic review of the evidence
    Williams, Phoebe C. M.
    Berkley, James A.
    PAEDIATRICS AND INTERNATIONAL CHILD HEALTH, 2018, 38 : S50 - S65
  • [7] Medication recommendations for treatment of lumbosacral radiculopathy: A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines
    Price, Morgan R.
    Mead, Kaelyn E.
    Cowell, Diana M.
    Troutner, Alyssa M.
    Barton, Tyler E.
    Walters, Sheryl A.
    Daniels, Clinton J.
    PM&R, 2024, 16 (10) : 1128 - 1142
  • [8] Pharmacological Treatment of Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review of Treatment Guidelines
    Tomiyama, Sota
    Yoshida, Kazunari
    Tani, Hideaki
    Uchida, Hiroyuki
    PHARMACOPSYCHIATRY, 2025,
  • [9] Recommendations for Diagnosis and Treatment of Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines
    Khorami, Ahmad Khoshal
    Oliveira, Crystian B.
    Maher, Christopher G.
    Bindels, Patrick J. E.
    Machado, Gustavo C.
    Pinto, Rafael Z.
    Koes, Bart W.
    Chiarotto, Alessandro
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (11)
  • [10] Clinical guidelines for early hepatocellular carcinoma treatment options: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis
    Wu, Chun-Ying
    Lin, Lee-Yuan
    Lee, Teng-Yu
    Hsu, Yao-Chun
    Yeh, Chun-Chieh
    Chen, Chiehfeng
    Kang, Yi-No
    Huang, Tsai-Wei
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2024, 110 (11) : 7234 - 7244