Premium
Investigating antenatal corticosteroid clinical guideline practice at an organisational level
Author(s) -
McGoldrick Emma L.,
Brown Julie A.,
Groom Katie M.,
Crowther Caroline A.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
australian and new zealand journal of obstetrics and gynaecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.734
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1479-828X
pISSN - 0004-8666
DOI - 10.1111/ajo.12564
Subject(s) - medicine , guideline , audit , caesarean section , intranet , family medicine , cross sectional study , computer assisted web interviewing , protocol (science) , health care , clinical practice , nursing , pregnancy , alternative medicine , the internet , business , management , biology , world wide web , computer science , economics , genetics , economic growth , pathology , marketing
Background High‐quality, evidence‐based guidelines can improve the quality of health care and facilitate standardisation of practice within and across healthcare organisations. Limited information is known regarding existing antenatal corticosteroid ( ACS ) guideline practices within organisations across Australia and New Zealand. Aims To assess existing ACS clinical practice guidelines ( CPG ). To describe current organisational practice related to the production, implementation and renewal of CPG . Design A cross‐sectional survey of hospital practice using an online questionnaire. Methods Clinical Managers at 27 secondary and 25 tertiary maternity hospitals, that contribute data to the Australia and New Zealand Neonatal Network, were approached from May to September 2015 and completed the questionnaire on behalf of their organisation. Results Of the hospitals surveyed, 93% reported having a CPG or protocol. Of these, 89% of CPG included recommendations on a single course of ACS , 37% on the use of repeat course/s and 41% on use prior to elective caesarean section at term. Variation in the recommendations provided existed between countries and depending on the level of neonatal care provided. A guideline development group existed in 85% of hospitals. The preferred tools to facilitate implementation of a CPG include: email with a link to the hospital intranet, education sessions and an opinion leader. Only 28% of respondents reported auditing the use of ACS administration. Conclusions There is significant variation in the recommendations provided by current ACS CPG s. Utilisation of a single ACS CPG reflective of the current available evidence base may limit this variation.