gms | German Medical Science

G-I-N Conference 2012

Guidelines International Network

22.08 - 25.08.2012, Berlin

National and multinational Guidelines – what do we need? Online survey on awareness of different national and European psoriasis guidelines

Meeting Abstract

  • A. Nast - Division of Evidence based Medicine, Charite - Universtitatsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • K. Kragballe - Department of Dermatology, Arhus University Hospital, Arhus, Denmark
  • K. Reich - Dermatologikum Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
  • U. Mrowietz - Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany

Guidelines International Network. G-I-N Conference 2012. Berlin, 22.-25.08.2012. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2012. DocP162

DOI: 10.3205/12gin274, URN: urn:nbn:de:0183-12gin2742

Published: July 10, 2012

© 2012 Nast et al.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.en). You are free: to Share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work, provided the original author and source are credited.


Outline

Text

Introduction: Guidelines (GLs) can be developed on national and multinational levels. The usefulness of different GLs on different regional levels is an ongoing open discussion.

Objective Assessment of awareness of guidelines as a means of guidelines evaluation

Methods: Online survey in 5 selected European countries (D, E, F, I, UK) among 250 dermatologists assessing awareness of different GLs (D, EU, E, F, UK). Results Mean awareness of EU GL in all countries was 53%, with lower results in countries with early (< 2006) development of own national Guidelines (UK: 33%, D: 37%) and higher awareness in countries with late (>2010) development of national guidelines (E: 63%, I: 79%). Awareness of national guidelines was very high within their respective countries (mean 92%). The national GLs were the best known guidelines in their respective countries, always followed by the EU-GLs. The most important tools for dissemination of all guidelines were the original publications (63%) and scientific presentations (46%).

Discussion: A large interest in GLs was identified when looking at the grade of awareness. Awareness of EU-GLs was high, especially in those countries with late development of own national guidelines. National GLs can reach a complete awareness within their respective countries. The original publication is still the most important dissemination tool.

Implications: The development of EU-GLs is likely to be particularly valuable for those countries that do not have resources for development of own national guidelines or for later adaption in the respective countries.