2017年中国发布的临床实践指南人员构成的分析  

Reporting status of personnel composition and distribution in Chinese clinical practice guidelines published in 2017: a survey analysis

作　　者：张林 赵明娟 黄瑞秀 梁丹丹 曾宪涛 赵博 靳英辉[1] ZHANG Lin;ZHAO Mingjuan;HUANG Ruixiu;LIANG Dandan;ZENG Xiantao;ZHAO Bo;JIN Yinghui(Center for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine,Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University/Center for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine,Wuhan University/Department of Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology,The Second Clinical College,Wuhan University,Wuhan,430071,F.R.China;Department of Ophthalmology,Huaihe Hospital of Henan University,Kaifeng,475000,P.R.China;Center for Evidence-Based and clinical research,Huaihe Hospital of Henan University,Kaifeng,475000,P.R.China;Department of Cardiology,the First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University,Kaifeng,475000,P.R.China;College of nursing and health,Henan University,Kaifeng,475000,P.R.China)

机构地区：[1]武汉大学中南医院循证与转化医学中心武汉大学循证与转化医学中心武汉大学第二临床学院循证医学与临床流行病学教研室,武汉430071 [2]河南大学淮河医院眼科,河南开封475000 [3]河南大学淮河医院循证医学与临床研究中心,河南开封475000 [4]河南大学第一附属医院心血管内科,河南开封475000 [5]河南大学护理与健康学院,河南开封475000

出　　处：《中国循证医学杂志》2019年第1期62-72,共11页Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine

基　　金：国家重点研发计划专项基金(编号:2016YFC0106300);国家卫健委医管中心委托项目(编号:医管办函〔2018〕61号);湖北省科技厅技术创新专项重大项目基金(编号:2016ACA152);湖北省卫生计生委联合基金项目(编号:WJ2018H0009)

摘　　要：目的调查2017年中国发布的医药卫生类临床实践指南(CPG)制/修订的参与人员及构成情况,为我国临床实践指南制/修订提供参考。方法计算机检索CNKI、WanFang Data和CBM数据库,补充检索Google学术,搜集2017年我国发布的CPG,检索时限均为2017年1月1日~12月31日。由2名研究者独立筛选文献,提取纳入指南的参与人员和构成情况,使用Microsoft Excel 2013软件进行统计分析。结果共纳入54部CPG,绝大部分为治疗性CPG。由学会/协会制订的共49部,占总评价指南的90.7%。24部(44.4%)指南报告了制订人员的地域分布及单位归属,如医院、学校、机构(科学院、研究所、实验室、疗养院)等。几乎所有指南的制/修订均体现了临床专业相关的多学科合作。15部(27.8%)提到方法学家参与,其中文献检索专家参与13部(24.1%)、流行病学专家参与2部(3.7%)、循证医学专家参与2部(3.7%)、统计学专家参与1部(1.9%)。3部(5.6%)提及指南草案送外审/同行评审。所有指南均未成立独立的系统评价小组。结论我国CPG制/修订组织对多学科合作、方法学家、患者参与和外部评审小组的重要性仍考虑不足,这将影响CPG的质量、实用性及可操作性。建议未来制/修订CPG时,需加强多学科合作,充分考虑多学科专业人员的重要性及患者的价值观,促进CPG指南的科学性和全面性。Objective To provide the referencefor the guideline development and revision in China, we analyzed the composition of personnel who participated in developing Chinese clinical practice guidelines(CPGs)published in 2017. Methods CNKI, WanFang Data, CBM and Google scholar were electronically searched to collect Chinese CPGs published from January 1st to December 31st, 2017. Two researchers independently screened literatures, extracted data of interest, such as composition and distribution of personnel, and analyzed the composition of personnel with Microsoft excel 2013. Results A total of 54 guidelines were included, and the majority of which are for treatment. Among which, 49 were developed by the associations accounting for 90.7%. Twenty-four(44.4%) guidelines reported the geographicaldistribution and unit ownership of the guideline developers, such as hospitals, schools, institutions(academies, institutes,laboratories, nursing homes, etc.). Almost all of the guidelines were developed by the cooperative work of experts from multidisciplinary clinical setting, 15(27.8%) of which mentioned the participation of the methodologist. Among which, 13(24.1%) of them involved literature retrieval experts, 2(3.7%) of them involved epidemiologists, 2(3.7%) of them involved evidence-based medicine experts, 1(1.9%) of them involved statistical expert. Three of which mentioned external peerreview. None of them has systematic review team. Conclusion In China, the CPG formulation/revision organization isstill not considering the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration, methodology researchers, and patients’ participation and external evaluation teams, which will affect the quality, practicability and maneuverability of CPG.We propose that multidisciplinary cooperation should be strengthened in the future while developing CPG, giving full consideration to the importance of medical personnel and the values of patients, and promoting the application of methodology.

关 键 词：临床实践指南 多学科 患者 系统评价 循证医学 

分 类 号：R-05[医药卫生]