• 1. Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 2. Evidence-Based Medicine Center/Chinese GRADE Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 3. The First Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 4. School of Stomatology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 5. The First Affiliated Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University College of Medicine, Xi'an 710061, China;
YANGKe-hu, Email: yangkh@lzu.edu.cn
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective To investigate the updating period, methods and procedures of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in China. Methods We searched WanFang Data, VIP, CNKI using the term "guideline" in the title, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) using "guideline" as the topic word up to December 2012. Then we screened and analyzed all included papers. Results A total of 380 Chinese CPGs were included. Thirty-eight (10%) guidelines have been updated, among which the longest update period was 10 years and the shortest was 1 year, and the average update period was 5.1 years. Eight (2%) of the updated guidelines had been updated more than once, and the average update time of them was 3, average update period was 4.9 years. There were 42 (12%) of the rest 342 guidelines which have never been updated mentioned that they would be updated. The detailed information of the updated guidelines according to their clinical objectives were as follow:1 (0.3%) was prevention guideline, of which the update period was 4 years; 8 (2%) were treatment guidelines and the average update period was 4.3 years; 5 (1%) were prevention and treatment guidelines, and the average update period was 6.8 years; 18 (5%) were diagnosis and treatment guidelines, and the average update period was 5.3 years; 4 (1%) were technology guidelines and the average update period was 5.5 years; and the average update period of the 2 (0.5%) integrative guidelines was 2.5 years. Forty (10%) of the total 380 guidelines had described their updating methods. Conclusion According the analysis of international studies and domestic guidelines, the update rate of Chinese CPGs is low, the update period is comparatively long, with differences found among them. The reporting of the updated CPGs' methods and procedures is insufficient, with less normalization. Big differences have been found in their updating condition among CPGs of different types and institutional developers.

Citation: CHENYao-long, WANGXiao-qin, WUQiong-fang, WEIDang, YAOLiang, WANGQi, YUANBo, WANGXin, YANGKe-hu. Survey on Update Condition of Clinical Practice Guidelines in China. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2014, 14(2): 178-183. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20140032 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Management of Hospital Infection Control of 23 Hospitals in Sichuan: A Cross-Sectional Survey
  • Next Article

    Efficacy and Safety of Mycophenolate Mofetil for Henoch-Schonlein Purpura Nephritis: A Systematic Review