%0 Journal Article
%T Calidad de las gu赤as de pr芍ctica cl赤nica cubanas Quality of the Cuban clinical practice guidelines
%A Ana Margarita Toledo Fern芍ndez
%A Niviola Cabrera Cruz
%A Amaylid Arteaga Garc赤a
%A Yoerquis Mej赤as S芍nchez
%J Revista Cubana de Salud P迆blica
%D 2011
%I Centro Nacional de Informaci車n de Ciencias M谷dicas
%X Se realiz車 una evaluaci車n de la calidad de las gu赤as de pr芍ctica cl赤nica producidas en Cuba por las distintas especialidades, en formato impreso y en la red telem芍tica de salud, con el prop車sito de identificar las debilidades que contienen que permitan confeccionar documentos metodol車gicos que contribuyan a su correcta elaboraci車n. Se decidieron criterios de elegibilidad, de inclusi車n y de exclusi車n. Se revisaron 377 documentos. Se utiliz車 el Instrumento Internacional de Evaluaci車n conocido como Appaisal of guidelines research and evaluation, el que fue aplicado por tres evaluadores para cada gu赤a, si los resultados resultaran discordantes, se reevaluaba la gu赤a por otros dos evaluadores independientes. Todos los evaluadores fueron previamente entrenados en el uso de instrumento. Algunas de las debilidades detectadas fueron: las gu赤as no est芍n realizadas por equipos multidisciplinarios, no se tuvo en cuenta el parecer de los pacientes, no dan respuestas a preguntas cl赤nicas, no declaran objetivos, ni poblaci車n diana ni criterios de inclusi車n ni de exclusi車n, entre otros. Se trabaja en la construcci車n de las Directrices Metodol車gicas para la Elaboraci車n y Adaptaci車n de Gu赤as de Pr芍ctica Cl赤nica en el Sistema Nacional de Salud. The quality of the Clinical Practice Guidelines made in Cuba by the various specialties was evaluated in print form and in the health telematic network, with the objective of identifying deficiencies in their drafting and thus drawing up methodological documents for their adequate preparation. Eligibility, inclusion and exclusion criteria were agreed upon. Three hundred seventy seven documents were reviewed. The International Evaluation Instrument known as Appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation was used. Three evaluators were in charge of assessing each guideline; if results did not match, then the guideline was re-evaluated by another pair of outside evaluators. All these persons were previously trained in the use of the instrument. Some of the detected deficiencies were: guidelines were not prepared by multidisplinary teams, the criteria of patients were not taken into consideration, they did not respond to clinical questions and they did not state their objectives, target population or inclusion/exclusion criteria. We are working on the making up of the Methodological Instructions for the Preparation and Adaptation of the Clinical Practice Guidelines in the National Health Care System.
%K Gu赤a de Pr芍ctica Cl赤nica
%K calidad
%K evaluaci車n
%K clinical practice guidelines
%K quality
%K evaluation
%U http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0864-34662011000300015