This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 119/1/16    most recent CIRCULATIONAHA.108.821470v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dippel, D. W.J. Articles by Simoons, M. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dippel, D. W.J. Articles by Simoons, M. L. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Stroke Related Collections Other Stroke

(Circulation. 2009;119:16-18.)
© 2009 American Heart Association, Inc.

Editorial

Improving Adherence to Guidelines for Acute Stroke Management

From the Department of Neurology (D.W.J.D.) and Thoraxcenter, Department of Cardiology (M.L.S.), Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Correspondence to Diederik W.J. Dippel, MD, PhD, PO Box 2040 3000 CA, The Netherlands. E-mail d.dippel@erasmusmc.nl

Key Words: Editorials • stroke • guidelines • guideline adherence

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

	Introduction

 
In recent years, many medical professional organizations such as the European Society of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Stroke Association have promoted guideline-based therapy for different groups of patients. These guidelines are based in part on large clinical trials and, when such are not available, on so-called expert opinion.

Article p 107

Some argue that pursuing adherence to guidelines is a worthy effort by itself, just to bring order into diversity. For others, it seems obvious that use of guidelines leads to improved quality of medical care and improved health outcomes. Yet a few wonder whether the chain of evidence from guideline development and implementation, adherence to guidelines, and improved process of care through improved quality and functional outcomes is everywhere as solid as it should be.

It has become quite clear that in order to improve healthcare quality, merely introducing guidelines is not sufficient, not even after creating a solid framework of evidence-based recommendations. The guidelines should be incorporated in a quality-assurance cycle with education programs and feedback from registries or surveys of clinical practice (Figure 1), such as the Get with the Guidelines program (GWTG).

View larger version (11K):   Figure 1. The quality assurance cycle: relationship between guideline development, education programs, and feedback from registries or surveys of clinical practice.

Several large surveys in Europe and the United States have indicated that adherence to guidelines for the clinical management of stroke and cardiovascular disease needs improvement.^1,2 For example, treatment with oral anticoagulants . . . [Full Text of this Article]