gms | German Medical Science

G-I-N Conference 2012

Guidelines International Network

22.08 - 25.08.2012, Berlin

Evidence based patient information; deriving patient information from CPGs and integrating into decision aids

Meeting Abstract

  • J.W. Mulder - Federation of Patients and Consumer Organisations in the Netherlands (NPCF), Utrecht, Netherlands
  • T. Drenthen - Dutch College of General Practitioners (NHG), Utrecht, Netherlands
  • D. Dreesens - Council for the Quality of Healthcare (Regieraad), The Hague, Netherlands
  • J. van Everdingen - Council for the Quality of Healthcare (Regieraad), The Hague, Netherlands

Guidelines International Network. G-I-N Conference 2012. Berlin, 22.-25.08.2012. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2012. DocP188

DOI: 10.3205/12gin300, URN: urn:nbn:de:0183-12gin3008

Published: July 10, 2012

© 2012 Mulder 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

Background: Patient information in the Netherlands isn't always available for every disease and topic. If there's information, the source and trustworthiness isn't always clear. Why not develop patient information 'guideline-proof' by basing it on evidence-based CPGs and integrating the information into decision aids for patients?

Context: A quick scan of patient information for the top-25 diseases made clear that, although for most diseases patient information is available, no source of information is provided. In many cases the information is not derived from (evidence-based) guidelines. Furthermore some decision aids at the National Health Portal are not based on the actual guidelines, have limited patient involvement and aren't easy to find. How to develop patient information according to an easily accessible and comprehensible format developed by patients, re-usable, and approved by professionals.

Best Practice Description: Phase one involved development of the authorisation procedure and formatting. CPG-stakeholders were asked to comment and improve on the information. Next patients pretested the format. The patients viewpoint was leading whilst developing the format. Information needs per patient differ so there is room for basic and comprehensive information (layered information). When relevant, references to tests, self management and patient organisations is added. Both format and procedure were pilot-tested and evaluated.

Results: Patient information on low back pain was according to the procedure and format developed and published. This lead to a sequel for asthma and colon cancer. The format is flexible and thus adjustable to the needs per disease.