TY - JOUR
T1 - Preventive care guidelines
T2 - 1991
AU - Hayward, Robert S.A.
AU - Steinberg, Earl P.
AU - Ford, Daniel E.
AU - Roizen, Michael F.
AU - Roach, Keith W.
PY - 1991/5/1
Y1 - 1991/5/1
N2 - Clinicians increasingly are urged to integrate preventive services into their clinical practices. To facilitate this process, several groups have developed practice guidelines for preventing disease in asymptomatic patients. In this paper, we compare and contrast preventive guidelines from the American College of Physicians (ACP), the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (CTF), the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), and other well-known authorities. We chose these groups because they based their recommendations on explicit methods that include critical appraisal of the pertinent literature. Recommendations from these authorities usually are consistent with each other. Moreover, the ACP, CTF, and USPSTF all favor a shift away from the relatively simple classification of patients by age and sex for general preventive interventions to the more complex stratification of patients by additional risk factors and the formulation of a selective prevention strategy that is specific to each risk profile. Some guidelines, particularly the criteria used to define patients who are at increased risk for preventable disease and who should have more intensive surveillance, are difficult to interpret. Further research is needed to address some areas of disagreement and ambiguity. In addition, new tools must be developed to help physicians apply preventive guidelines, particularly those that require noting many patient-specific characteristics.
AB - Clinicians increasingly are urged to integrate preventive services into their clinical practices. To facilitate this process, several groups have developed practice guidelines for preventing disease in asymptomatic patients. In this paper, we compare and contrast preventive guidelines from the American College of Physicians (ACP), the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (CTF), the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), and other well-known authorities. We chose these groups because they based their recommendations on explicit methods that include critical appraisal of the pertinent literature. Recommendations from these authorities usually are consistent with each other. Moreover, the ACP, CTF, and USPSTF all favor a shift away from the relatively simple classification of patients by age and sex for general preventive interventions to the more complex stratification of patients by additional risk factors and the formulation of a selective prevention strategy that is specific to each risk profile. Some guidelines, particularly the criteria used to define patients who are at increased risk for preventable disease and who should have more intensive surveillance, are difficult to interpret. Further research is needed to address some areas of disagreement and ambiguity. In addition, new tools must be developed to help physicians apply preventive guidelines, particularly those that require noting many patient-specific characteristics.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025728291&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025728291&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.7326/0003-4819-114-9-758
DO - 10.7326/0003-4819-114-9-758
M3 - Review article
C2 - 2012359
AN - SCOPUS:0025728291
SN - 0003-4819
VL - 114
SP - 758
EP - 783
JO - Annals of internal medicine
JF - Annals of internal medicine
IS - 9
ER -