Guideline use behaviours and needs of primary-care practitioners in China: A cross-sectional survey




Poster session 3 Friday: Evidence Tools / Evidence synthesis - creation, publication and updating in the digital age


Friday 15 September 2017 - 12:30 to 14:00


All authors in correct order:

Zeng L1, Li Y2, Liu G2, Zhang Y1, Zhen S3, Li H3, Song X4, Duan Y5, Yu J6, Wang X3
1 Pharmacy Department, West China Second University Hospital, China
2 Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Centre/Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China
3 West China Hospital Institute of Management, Sichuan University, China
4 West China school of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, China
5 College of Pharmacy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, America
6 2. Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Centre/Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China
Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author:

Linan Zeng

Contact person:

Abstract text
Background: Clinical guidelines are known as an effective way to improve health performance. However, little is known about general practitioners’ attitudes to and behaviours concerning clinical guidelines in China.

Objectives: The aim of this study is to investigate use behaviours and needs of clinical guideline in primary care of China.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 268 institutions in 15 provinces of China from December 2015 to May 2016. The questionnaire was developed by literature review and experts consultation method. On-site survey was performed by paper questionnaires to minimise response missing. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the knowledge of and attitude towards clinical guidelines.

Results: Among respondents, 91.7%(1568/1708) knew clinical guidelines but only 11.3%(177/1568) frequently use them. The main access to guidelines for primary-care practitioners was public search engines (63.4%;911/1438) instead of biomedical database and the major barriers for primary-care practitioners to use guidelines included lack of training (49.9%;778/1560), access (44.6%;696/1560) and awareness (38.0%;592/1560). Only less than ¼ of respondents considered current guidelines were ‘entirely appropriate’ for primary-care setting (23.5%;339/1442). Most participants (96.2%;1509/1568) admitted the necessity of developing clinical guidelines for primary care. The attitude towards current guideline was associated with institutions’ location, level, and professional title (P<0.05).

Conclusions: Our survey reveals poor knowledge and use of clinical guidelines in primary care as well as the gap between the needs and current status of clinical guidelines for primary care in China. In addition, lack of access to and training in the development of guidelines also prevent primary healthcare practitioners from using guidelines in their daily practice.