The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Why surgeons don’t follow guidelines

Why surgeons don’t follow guidelines
Why surgeons don’t follow guidelines
Introduction Widespread and persistent medical and surgical practice variation is held to be a consequence of the failure of clinicians to incorporate research evidence in their everyday work. Practice guidelines are one of the key tactics advocated by the proponents of evidence-based medicine (EBM) to ensure that clinicians apply research evidence to their practice. The critics of EBM contend that there are fundamental differences between the formulised rules encapsulated in guidelines and the type of knowledge required to practise medicine. Much of the opposition to guidelines has been rooted in philosophical arguments about the tensions between "art" and "science", and surgeons, in particular have been quick to argue that the exercise of clinical judgement makes the use of guidelines problematic. The aim of this paper is to suggest why surgeons ignore guidelines.
Methods A qualitative study of 34 surgeons practising urology, gynaecology or pelvic surgery in the UK and USA, involved in treating women with stress urinary incontinence. Qualitative interviews and observational methods were used to explore surgeons' views of surgical practice, to examine the nature of everyday surgical work and consider the applicability of guidelines to this area of medical work. Analysis used techniques of constant comparison to generate themes and categories.
Results Surgeons view surgical work as contingent: they describe it as both dependent on conditional factors and subject to chance. They respond to contingency by drawing on tacit knowledge and instinctive responses. Surgical judgement provides a strong justification for resisting the imposition of guidelines.
Conclusion The technical knowledge embodied in guidelines may be difficult to reconcile with the individual and practical nature of everyday surgical work.
Pope, C.
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607
Pope, C.
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607

Pope, C. (2000) Why surgeons don’t follow guidelines. Society for Social Medicine annual meeting 2000, Norwich, UK. 05 - 07 Jun 2000.

Record type: Conference or Workshop Item (Other)

Abstract

Introduction Widespread and persistent medical and surgical practice variation is held to be a consequence of the failure of clinicians to incorporate research evidence in their everyday work. Practice guidelines are one of the key tactics advocated by the proponents of evidence-based medicine (EBM) to ensure that clinicians apply research evidence to their practice. The critics of EBM contend that there are fundamental differences between the formulised rules encapsulated in guidelines and the type of knowledge required to practise medicine. Much of the opposition to guidelines has been rooted in philosophical arguments about the tensions between "art" and "science", and surgeons, in particular have been quick to argue that the exercise of clinical judgement makes the use of guidelines problematic. The aim of this paper is to suggest why surgeons ignore guidelines.
Methods A qualitative study of 34 surgeons practising urology, gynaecology or pelvic surgery in the UK and USA, involved in treating women with stress urinary incontinence. Qualitative interviews and observational methods were used to explore surgeons' views of surgical practice, to examine the nature of everyday surgical work and consider the applicability of guidelines to this area of medical work. Analysis used techniques of constant comparison to generate themes and categories.
Results Surgeons view surgical work as contingent: they describe it as both dependent on conditional factors and subject to chance. They respond to contingency by drawing on tacit knowledge and instinctive responses. Surgical judgement provides a strong justification for resisting the imposition of guidelines.
Conclusion The technical knowledge embodied in guidelines may be difficult to reconcile with the individual and practical nature of everyday surgical work.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2000
Venue - Dates: Society for Social Medicine annual meeting 2000, Norwich, UK, 2000-06-05 - 2000-06-07

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 44314
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/44314
PURE UUID: 1db160ef-7bd9-486f-918f-afad429bd52a
ORCID for C. Pope: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8935-6702

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 26 Feb 2007
Last modified: 12 Dec 2021 03:25

Export record

Contributors

Author: C. Pope ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×