G2TT
来源类型Research Reports
规范类型报告
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.7249/RR1819
来源IDRR-1819-icare
Technical Quality and Clinical Acceptability of a Utilization Review Guideline for Occupational Conditions: ODG® Treatment Guidelines by the Work Loss Data Institute
Teryl K. Nuckols; Kanaka Shetty; Laura Raaen; Dmitry Khodyakov
发表日期2017
出版年2017
页码55
语种英语
结论

The Official Disability Guidelines (ODG) Medical Treatment Guidelines received overall favorable ratings from expert clinicians on content related to common occupational conditions, despite notable limitations to the methods used to develop the guidelines. ODG's strengths include an expansive scope, clearly written recommendations, frequent updating, regular and extensive input from clinicians, and a well-designed tool for applying recommendations. Weaknesses include limited input from workers with occupational conditions, inadequate information about the process by which evidence is identified and synthesized, and lack of documentation that ODG chapter development teams were free of conflicts of interest and had editorial independence. Of note, however, expert panelists in diverse clinical specialties found material related to 41 of the 47 topics that they considered in the ODG to be clinically valid, reflecting a relatively high degree of confidence in the clinical acceptability of the guideline. For the six remaining topics, including medications and nonoperative procedures for neck and upper back injuries as well as nonoperative procedures for hip injuries, content was of uncertain validity. Several panelists also noted that the evidence basis for numbers of allowed physical therapy sessions was uncertain.

摘要
  • Payers, policymakers, and clinicians who are considering implementing the Official Disability Guidelines (ODG) should note that diverse clinical experts from the United States and Australia agreed that most of the guideline content related to common occupational disorders was valid. However, to ensure patients with occupational conditions achieve the most favorable clinical and occupational outcomes possible, workers' compensation stakeholders -- such as ODG users, employers, and workers -- may want to consider whether WLDI takes future steps to address ODG's limitations, including limitations to technical quality and on specific clinical topics.
  • WLDI can improve ODG by engaging workers or their representatives; ensuring that experienced methodologists are involved in guideline development; improving documentation of search terms, selection criteria, and numbers of studies identified and eligible, and creating evidence tables that describe published literature for each recommendation; documenting and mitigating any conflicts of interest among ODG chapter development teams and ensuring that they have editorial independence; and continuing to seek and incorporate regular feedback from clinicians and others as to the optimal formulation of individual guideline recommendations.
主题Cost-Effectiveness in Health Care ; Evidence Based Health Practice ; Health Care Program Evaluation ; Workers' Compensation
URLhttps://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1819.html
来源智库RAND Corporation (United States)
引用统计
资源类型智库出版物
条目标识符http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/108548
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Teryl K. Nuckols,Kanaka Shetty,Laura Raaen,et al. Technical Quality and Clinical Acceptability of a Utilization Review Guideline for Occupational Conditions: ODG® Treatment Guidelines by the Work Loss Data Institute. 2017.
条目包含的文件
文件名称/大小 资源类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
x1503660320023.jpg(6KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
RAND_RR1819.pdf(277KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Teryl K. Nuckols]的文章
[Kanaka Shetty]的文章
[Laura Raaen]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Teryl K. Nuckols]的文章
[Kanaka Shetty]的文章
[Laura Raaen]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Teryl K. Nuckols]的文章
[Kanaka Shetty]的文章
[Laura Raaen]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
文件名: x1503660320023.jpg
格式: JPEG
文件名: RAND_RR1819.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。