The value and limitations of guidelines, expert consensus, and registries on the management of patients with thoracic aortic disease

11Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Doctors are often faced with difficult decisions and uncertainty when patients need a certain treatment. They routinely rely on the scientific literature, in addition to their knowledge, experience, and patient preferences. Clinical practice guidelines are created with the intention of facilitating decision-making. They may offer concise instructions for the diagnosis, management (medical or surgical treatments), and prevention of specific diseases o r conditions. All information included in the final version are the result of asystematic review of scientific articles and an assessment of the benefits and costs of alternative care options. The final document attempts to meet the needs of most patients in most circumstances and clinicians, aware of these recommendations, should always make individualized treatment decisions. In this review, we attempted to define the intent and applicability of clinical practice guidelines, expert consensus documents, and registry studies, focusing on the management of patients with thoracic aortic disease.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pacini, D., Murana, G., Leone, A., Di Marco, L., & Pantaleo, A. (2016). The value and limitations of guidelines, expert consensus, and registries on the management of patients with thoracic aortic disease. Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. https://doi.org/10.5090/kjtcs.2016.49.6.413

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free