[Physicians' Adherence to Clinical Guidelines on the Chronic Heart Failure Diagnosis and Treatment: Changes Over 2 Years of the Document's Existence].

IF 0.5 4区医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

Kardiologiya Pub Date : 2024-02-29 DOI:10.18087/cardio.2024.2.n2436

N D Perepech, A V Tregubov, I E Mikhailova

{"title":"[Physicians' Adherence to Clinical Guidelines on the Chronic Heart Failure Diagnosis and Treatment: Changes Over 2 Years of the Document's Existence].","authors":"N D Perepech, A V Tregubov, I E Mikhailova","doi":"10.18087/cardio.2024.2.n2436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To study how physicians' commitment to the basic provisions of clinical guidelines (CGs) for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF) has changed over the two years of the document existence.Material and methods: An anonymous survey was performed for 263 physicians (204 cardiologists, 46 internists and 13 other specialists) who were trained in advanced training programs in 2022. The questionnaire included questions regarding self-assessment of the respondents' professional knowledge, their attitude to the role of CGs in everyday practice and ideas about methods for treatment of CHF.Results: Respondents gave 60.6 % correct answers to questions related to the treatment of CHF. More than 70% correct answers were given by 42.7% of cardiologists and 17.4% of internists. Compared to 2020, the proportion of cardiologists who gave more than 70 % correct answers increased significantly (p<0.05). CGs were considered mandatory by 26.2% and important or sometimes useful by 71.5% of respondents. Cardiologists considered CGs mandatory more frequently than internists (29.9 and 15.2 %, respectively; p=0.04). The mean number of correct answers was greater in the subgroup of respondents who considered CGs mandatory (p<0.001). More than 70% correct answers were given by only 43.8% of cardiologists, who considered themselves fully informed and able to advise colleagues on complex issues of diagnosis and treatment of CHF, and 40.6% of physicians who considered their knowledge acceptable for managing patients with CHF.Conclusion: The majority of physician consider CGs an important methodological document but only a little more than 25 % are aware that CGs are mandatory. Cardiologists are better informed than internists about the principal provisions of National Clinical Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CHF, but the average level of physician knowledge remains low.","PeriodicalId":54750,"journal":{"name":"Kardiologiya","volume":"64 2","pages":"43-50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kardiologiya","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18087/cardio.2024.2.n2436","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To study how physicians' commitment to the basic provisions of clinical guidelines (CGs) for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF) has changed over the two years of the document existence.

Material and methods: An anonymous survey was performed for 263 physicians (204 cardiologists, 46 internists and 13 other specialists) who were trained in advanced training programs in 2022. The questionnaire included questions regarding self-assessment of the respondents' professional knowledge, their attitude to the role of CGs in everyday practice and ideas about methods for treatment of CHF.

Results: Respondents gave 60.6 % correct answers to questions related to the treatment of CHF. More than 70% correct answers were given by 42.7% of cardiologists and 17.4% of internists. Compared to 2020, the proportion of cardiologists who gave more than 70 % correct answers increased significantly (p<0.05). CGs were considered mandatory by 26.2% and important or sometimes useful by 71.5% of respondents. Cardiologists considered CGs mandatory more frequently than internists (29.9 and 15.2 %, respectively; p=0.04). The mean number of correct answers was greater in the subgroup of respondents who considered CGs mandatory (p<0.001). More than 70% correct answers were given by only 43.8% of cardiologists, who considered themselves fully informed and able to advise colleagues on complex issues of diagnosis and treatment of CHF, and 40.6% of physicians who considered their knowledge acceptable for managing patients with CHF.

Conclusion: The majority of physician consider CGs an important methodological document but only a little more than 25 % are aware that CGs are mandatory. Cardiologists are better informed than internists about the principal provisions of National Clinical Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CHF, but the average level of physician knowledge remains low.

查看原文本刊更多论文

[医生对《慢性心力衰竭诊断和治疗临床指南》的遵守情况：文件发布两年来的变化]。

目的：研究慢性心力衰竭（CHF）诊断和治疗临床指南（CGs）出台两年来，医生对其基本规定的承诺发生了哪些变化：对 2022 年接受高级培训课程的 263 名医生（204 名心脏病专家、46 名内科医生和 13 名其他专家）进行了匿名调查。调查问卷包括受访者对专业知识的自我评估、对CG在日常实践中的作用的态度以及对CHF治疗方法的看法等问题：受访者对有关治疗慢性心力衰竭的问题给出了 60.6% 的正确答案。42.7%的心脏病专家和 17.4%的内科医生给出了超过 70% 的正确答案。与 2020 年相比，回答正确率超过 70% 的心脏病专家比例显著增加（p<0.05）。26.2%的受访者认为心电图必须使用，71.5%的受访者认为心电图重要或有时有用。与内科医生相比，心脏病专家更常认为 CGs 是强制性的（分别为 29.9% 和 15.2%；p=0.04）。在认为 CGs 是强制性的受访者亚群中，正确答案的平均数量更高（p<0.001）。只有 43.8%的心脏病专家和 40.6%的医生给出了超过 70% 的正确答案，前者认为自己完全了解并有能力就慢性阻塞性肺疾病诊断和治疗的复杂问题向同事提供建议，而后者则认为自己在管理慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者方面的知识是可以接受的：结论：大多数医生认为CGs是重要的方法文件，但只有25%多一点的医生知道CGs是强制性的。心脏病专家比内科医生更了解《国家临床指南》中关于诊断和治疗慢性心力衰竭的主要规定，但医生的平均知识水平仍然较低。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Kardiologiya 医学-心血管系统

CiteScore

1.70

自引率

20.00%

发文量

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： “Kardiologiya” (Cardiology) is a monthly scientific, peer-reviewed journal committed to both basic cardiovascular medicine and practical aspects of cardiology. As the leader in its field, “Kardiologiya” provides original coverage of recent progress in cardiovascular medicine. We publish state-of-the-art articles integrating clinical and research activities in the fields of basic cardiovascular science and clinical cardiology, with a focus on emerging issues in cardiovascular disease. Our target audience spans a diversity of health care professionals and medical researchers working in cardiovascular medicine and related fields. The principal language of the Journal is Russian, an additional language – English (title, authors’ information, abstract, keywords). “Kardiologiya” is a peer-reviewed scientific journal. All articles are reviewed by scientists, who gained high international prestige in cardiovascular science and clinical cardiology. The Journal is currently cited and indexed in major Abstracting & Indexing databases: Web of Science, Medline and Scopus. The Journal''s primary objectives Contribute to raising the professional level of medical researchers, physicians and academic teachers. Present the results of current research and clinical observations, explore the effectiveness of drug and non-drug treatments of heart disease, inform about new diagnostic techniques; discuss current trends and new advancements in clinical cardiology, contribute to continuing medical education, inform readers about results of Russian and international scientific forums; Further improve the general quality of reviewing and editing of manuscripts submitted for publication; Provide the widest possible dissemination of the published articles, among the global scientific community; Extend distribution and indexing of scientific publications in major Abstracting & Indexing databases.