Bringing the patient back in

Guidelines, practice variations, and the social context of medical practice

Ann Lennarson Greer, James Goodwin, Jean L. Freeman, Z. Helen Wu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We challenge assumptions that have guided much research and policy aimed at understanding and reducing medical practice variation. Paramount is the focus on doctors as the cause of variation to the neglect of other possible influences. Some research literature suggests that patients, families, and the community context of practice may also influence treatment decisions. Failure to question present assumptions, despite weak evidence in support of them, may account for inability to explain persistent practice variation, develop appropriate implementable guidelines, or anticipate the effect on treatment decisions of greater patient involvement. In this paper, we discuss the weak response to the NIH Consensus Conference on early stage breast cancer because it may have reflected these problems. We urge a more complex and more empirical approach in explaining treatment choice and guidelines sensitive to the potential for value differences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)747-761
Number of pages15
JournalInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Volume18
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Practice Guidelines
Guidelines
Patient Participation
Research
Consensus
Therapeutics
Breast Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Breast cancer
  • Consensus conference
  • Patient preferences
  • Practice guidelines
  • Practice variation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Health Informatics
  • Health Information Management
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Bringing the patient back in : Guidelines, practice variations, and the social context of medical practice. / Greer, Ann Lennarson; Goodwin, James; Freeman, Jean L.; Wu, Z. Helen.

In: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 18, No. 4, 09.2002, p. 747-761.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4312ff90e7004b4883f3f13a73bbe603,
title = "Bringing the patient back in: Guidelines, practice variations, and the social context of medical practice",
abstract = "We challenge assumptions that have guided much research and policy aimed at understanding and reducing medical practice variation. Paramount is the focus on doctors as the cause of variation to the neglect of other possible influences. Some research literature suggests that patients, families, and the community context of practice may also influence treatment decisions. Failure to question present assumptions, despite weak evidence in support of them, may account for inability to explain persistent practice variation, develop appropriate implementable guidelines, or anticipate the effect on treatment decisions of greater patient involvement. In this paper, we discuss the weak response to the NIH Consensus Conference on early stage breast cancer because it may have reflected these problems. We urge a more complex and more empirical approach in explaining treatment choice and guidelines sensitive to the potential for value differences.",
keywords = "Breast cancer, Consensus conference, Patient preferences, Practice guidelines, Practice variation",
author = "Greer, {Ann Lennarson} and James Goodwin and Freeman, {Jean L.} and Wu, {Z. Helen}",
year = "2002",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1017/S0266462302000569",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "747--761",
journal = "International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care",
issn = "0266-4623",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bringing the patient back in

T2 - Guidelines, practice variations, and the social context of medical practice

AU - Greer, Ann Lennarson

AU - Goodwin, James

AU - Freeman, Jean L.

AU - Wu, Z. Helen

PY - 2002/9

Y1 - 2002/9

N2 - We challenge assumptions that have guided much research and policy aimed at understanding and reducing medical practice variation. Paramount is the focus on doctors as the cause of variation to the neglect of other possible influences. Some research literature suggests that patients, families, and the community context of practice may also influence treatment decisions. Failure to question present assumptions, despite weak evidence in support of them, may account for inability to explain persistent practice variation, develop appropriate implementable guidelines, or anticipate the effect on treatment decisions of greater patient involvement. In this paper, we discuss the weak response to the NIH Consensus Conference on early stage breast cancer because it may have reflected these problems. We urge a more complex and more empirical approach in explaining treatment choice and guidelines sensitive to the potential for value differences.

AB - We challenge assumptions that have guided much research and policy aimed at understanding and reducing medical practice variation. Paramount is the focus on doctors as the cause of variation to the neglect of other possible influences. Some research literature suggests that patients, families, and the community context of practice may also influence treatment decisions. Failure to question present assumptions, despite weak evidence in support of them, may account for inability to explain persistent practice variation, develop appropriate implementable guidelines, or anticipate the effect on treatment decisions of greater patient involvement. In this paper, we discuss the weak response to the NIH Consensus Conference on early stage breast cancer because it may have reflected these problems. We urge a more complex and more empirical approach in explaining treatment choice and guidelines sensitive to the potential for value differences.

KW - Breast cancer

KW - Consensus conference

KW - Patient preferences

KW - Practice guidelines

KW - Practice variation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036767484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036767484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0266462302000569

DO - 10.1017/S0266462302000569

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 747

EP - 761

JO - International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

JF - International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

SN - 0266-4623

IS - 4

ER -