Article type
Abstract
Background: In 2014, the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare and the Norwegian Directorate of Health started to develop national guidelines on dementia. As the time coincided, collaboration on selected topics was initiated. The central aspect of the collaboration was to develop scientific materials which then could be shared by the two countries and used by their different working groups for development of recommendations. The recommendations were adapted to the different countries’ requirements and needs.
Objectives: The aim was to compare recommendations in two national guidelines on dementia using the same scientific evidence.
Methods: An evidence-based approach which included scoping, development of research questions (PICO-format) and a literature search for systematic reviews was used. The literature was assessed for inclusion and methodological quality by two authors independently. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. The work was conducted in Norway.
There were overlapping recommendations in the area of anti-dementia drugs, psychotropic drugs and psychosocial interventions and for these the systematic scientific background material was shared.
Results: Overall, there is a significant overlap between the recommendations for anti-dementia drugs, psychotropic drugs, and psychosocial interventions, both with respect to strength and direction. However, at a detailed level there are some differences – see Table 1. For psychosocial interventions, Norway and Sweden used different ways of presenting the recommendations, which make direct comparisons difficult.
Conclusions: Using the same scientific background materials for developing recommendations in national guidelines lead, in general, to the same level of recommendations.
Some differences in the recommendations for anti-dementia and psychotropic medical treatment were found in areas where the scientific evidence was weaker. In these situations the recommendations were based to a higher degree on the expertise and experience of the members of the working groups.
Objectives: The aim was to compare recommendations in two national guidelines on dementia using the same scientific evidence.
Methods: An evidence-based approach which included scoping, development of research questions (PICO-format) and a literature search for systematic reviews was used. The literature was assessed for inclusion and methodological quality by two authors independently. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. The work was conducted in Norway.
There were overlapping recommendations in the area of anti-dementia drugs, psychotropic drugs and psychosocial interventions and for these the systematic scientific background material was shared.
Results: Overall, there is a significant overlap between the recommendations for anti-dementia drugs, psychotropic drugs, and psychosocial interventions, both with respect to strength and direction. However, at a detailed level there are some differences – see Table 1. For psychosocial interventions, Norway and Sweden used different ways of presenting the recommendations, which make direct comparisons difficult.
Conclusions: Using the same scientific background materials for developing recommendations in national guidelines lead, in general, to the same level of recommendations.
Some differences in the recommendations for anti-dementia and psychotropic medical treatment were found in areas where the scientific evidence was weaker. In these situations the recommendations were based to a higher degree on the expertise and experience of the members of the working groups.