↓ Skip to main content

Adherence to COPD management guidelines in general practice? A review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Irish Journal of Medical Science, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Adherence to COPD management guidelines in general practice? A review of the literature
Published in
Irish Journal of Medical Science, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11845-017-1651-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Sehl, J. O’Doherty, R. O’Connor, B. O’Sullivan, A. O’Regan

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive illness that is mostly managed in the general practice setting. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines are the international gold standard, and it is important to understand how these are being applied in general practice. This review aimed to assess the current level of adherence to international best practice guidelines among general practitioners in relation to COPD. PubMed and EMBASE searches (from 2012 to 2016) were performed and used the search terms guidelines, COPD, general practitioners, and primary care. Papers were excluded if they were not primary sources, were published before 2012, or did not pertain to a general practice setting. After applying set inclusion and exclusion criteria, 11 studies were retrieved. These papers were grouped under three categories: diagnosis, pharmacological, and non-pharmacological management, based on the GOLD guidelines. Current studies show significant variability in adherence to the GOLD guidelines. Barriers identified include lack of clarity, unfamiliarity with recommendations, and lack of familiarity with the guidelines. If general practice is expected to manage COPD and other chronic diseases, health service investment is needed to provide appropriate focused guidelines, to support their dissemination and resources to implement them in practice.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 18%
Researcher 10 17%
Other 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Computer Science 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 18 30%