Guideline use behaviours and needs of primary-care practitioners in China: A cross-sectional survey

Article type
Authors
Zeng L1, Li Y2, Liu G2, Zhang Y1, Zhen S3, Li H3, Song X4, Duan Y5, Yu J6, Wang X3
1Pharmacy Department, West China Second University Hospital
2Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Centre/Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University
3West China Hospital Institute of Management, Sichuan University
4West China school of Pharmacy, Sichuan University
5College of Pharmacy, University of Nebraska Medical Center
62. Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Centre/Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University
Abstract
Background: Clinical guidelines are known as an effective way to improve health performance. However, little is known about general practitioners’ attitudes to and behaviours concerning clinical guidelines in China.

Objectives: The aim of this study is to investigate use behaviours and needs of clinical guideline in primary care of China.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 268 institutions in 15 provinces of China from December 2015 to May 2016. The questionnaire was developed by literature review and experts consultation method. On-site survey was performed by paper questionnaires to minimise response missing. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the knowledge of and attitude towards clinical guidelines.

Results: Among respondents, 91.7%(1568/1708) knew clinical guidelines but only 11.3%(177/1568) frequently use them. The main access to guidelines for primary-care practitioners was public search engines (63.4%;911/1438) instead of biomedical database and the major barriers for primary-care practitioners to use guidelines included lack of training (49.9%;778/1560), access (44.6%;696/1560) and awareness (38.0%;592/1560). Only less than ¼ of respondents considered current guidelines were ‘entirely appropriate’ for primary-care setting (23.5%;339/1442). Most participants (96.2%;1509/1568) admitted the necessity of developing clinical guidelines for primary care. The attitude towards current guideline was associated with institutions’ location, level, and professional title (P