IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v43y1996i8p1283-1287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Physicians' view of practice guidelines. A survey of Italian physicians

Author

Listed:
  • Grilli, Roberto
  • Penna, Angelo
  • Zola, Paolo
  • Liberati, Alessandro

Abstract

After more than 10 years of development, two different views of practice guidelines are emerging: either as an educational tool for the medical profession, or as a forum where health care issues can be debated by physicians and non-medical groups. Physicians use practice guidelines in the former model to set their own standards of good quality care, while the latter approach needs contributions from other components in order to decide what should be provided by our health care systems. In a survey of Italian physicians' opinions and attitudes toward practice guidelines, responders supported the "narrowest" model. More than 80% stated that improvement of quality of care and reduction of variation in clinical practice styles should be the aim of practice guidelines, without representatives from outside the medical profession being involved (61%, 79% and 86% disagreed with a possible involvement, respectively, of patients, health care administrators and representatives of the public at large). Overall, 38% of physicians had a positive attitude toward guidelines viewed as a quality assurance tool for the medical profession. Overall, physicians seem to ignore that the need to rationalize health care calls for input from other professions and members of society. Indeed, most of the issues facing medicine today are mainly a matter of how much value our societies attach to the benefit expected from the available health services. The answers as to what should be done in health care probably cannot be left to the medical profession alone.

Suggested Citation

  • Grilli, Roberto & Penna, Angelo & Zola, Paolo & Liberati, Alessandro, 1996. "Physicians' view of practice guidelines. A survey of Italian physicians," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1283-1287, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:8:p:1283-1287
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(96)00040-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:8:p:1283-1287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.