The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines

Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines
Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines
Background: GPs' adherence to clinical practice guidelines is variable. Barriers to guideline implementation have been identified but qualitative studies have not been synthesised to explore what underpins these attitudes.
Aim: To explore and synthesise qualitative research on GPs' attitudes to and experiences with clinical practice guidelines.
Design of study: Systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.
Method: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index were used as data sources, and independent data extraction was carried out. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Initial thematic analysis was conducted, followed by interpretative synthesis.
Results: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Five were excluded following quality appraisal. Twelve papers were synthesised which reported research in the UK, US, Canada, and the Netherlands, and covered different clinical guideline topics. Six themes were identified: questioning the guidelines, GPs' experience, preserving the doctor-patient relationship, professional responsibility, practical issues, and guideline format. Comparative analysis and synthesis revealed that GPs' reasons for not following guidelines differed according to whether the guideline in question was prescriptive, in that it encouraged a certain type of behaviour or treatment, or proscriptive, in that it discouraged certain treatments or behaviours.
Conclusion: Previous analyses of guidelines have focused on professional attitudes and organisational barriers to adherence. This synthesis suggests that the purpose of the guideline, whether its aims are prescriptive or proscriptive, may influence if and how guidelines are received and implemented.
attitudes of health personnel, general practice, guideline adherence, guidelines, meta-synthesis, qualitative research
0960-1643
971-978
Carlsen, Benedicte
2cb22b69-ab14-49c2-9a1d-44a9c2ed2b7c
Glenton, Claire
372189df-d108-460d-a258-6379b2fc638e
Pope, Catherine
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607
Carlsen, Benedicte
2cb22b69-ab14-49c2-9a1d-44a9c2ed2b7c
Glenton, Claire
372189df-d108-460d-a258-6379b2fc638e
Pope, Catherine
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607

Carlsen, Benedicte, Glenton, Claire and Pope, Catherine (2007) Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines. British Journal of General Practice, 57 (545), 971-978. (doi:10.3399/096016407782604820).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: GPs' adherence to clinical practice guidelines is variable. Barriers to guideline implementation have been identified but qualitative studies have not been synthesised to explore what underpins these attitudes.
Aim: To explore and synthesise qualitative research on GPs' attitudes to and experiences with clinical practice guidelines.
Design of study: Systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.
Method: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index were used as data sources, and independent data extraction was carried out. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Initial thematic analysis was conducted, followed by interpretative synthesis.
Results: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Five were excluded following quality appraisal. Twelve papers were synthesised which reported research in the UK, US, Canada, and the Netherlands, and covered different clinical guideline topics. Six themes were identified: questioning the guidelines, GPs' experience, preserving the doctor-patient relationship, professional responsibility, practical issues, and guideline format. Comparative analysis and synthesis revealed that GPs' reasons for not following guidelines differed according to whether the guideline in question was prescriptive, in that it encouraged a certain type of behaviour or treatment, or proscriptive, in that it discouraged certain treatments or behaviours.
Conclusion: Previous analyses of guidelines have focused on professional attitudes and organisational barriers to adherence. This synthesis suggests that the purpose of the guideline, whether its aims are prescriptive or proscriptive, may influence if and how guidelines are received and implemented.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Submitted date: 24 May 2007
Published date: 3 December 2007
Keywords: attitudes of health personnel, general practice, guideline adherence, guidelines, meta-synthesis, qualitative research

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 50368
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/50368
ISSN: 0960-1643
PURE UUID: aedc0532-c655-4c02-abf1-1594be63fca9
ORCID for Catherine Pope: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8935-6702

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 20 Feb 2008
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 10:05

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Benedicte Carlsen
Author: Claire Glenton
Author: Catherine 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.

×