Introduction


Why Is the APA Developing Practice Guidelines?

How Are Practice Guidelines Developed?

What Are the Potential Benefits of This Project?

What Are the Possible Risks?

How Can We Improve the Current Process?

Quick Reference Guides

Online CME

Conclusions

The term practice guideline refers to a set of patient care strategies developed to assist physicians in clinical decision making. The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is continually developing new and revised guidelines, which are published as they are completed.

APA recognizes that guideline recommendations are most useful if they are current. As a result, APA releases “guidelines watches” as necessary. Watches briefly describe major developments in the scientific literature since original guideline publication. Watches may be authored and reviewed by experts associated with the original guideline development effort and are approved for publication by APA's Executive Committee on Practice Guidelines. Thus, watches represent opinion of the authors and approval of the Executive Committee but not policy of the APA.

Readers should note that these parameters of care are indeed “guidelines” and are not intended to be “standards of care.” These guidelines do not necessarily include all proper methods of care for a particular disorder. The ultimate judgment concerning the selection and implementation of a specific plan of treatment must be made by the psychiatrist in light of the clinical data presented by the patient and the diagnostic and treatment options available. Further description of the intended role of the practice guidelines can be found in the Statement of Intent.

Although the APA has published specific recommendations about the practice of psychiatry since 1851, the commitment of resources to the practice guideline development process since 1991 represents a qualitative change in the APA's role in establishing guidelines. Such a change raises many questions.

Why Is the APA Developing Practice Guidelines?

For nearly 150 years, the APA's fundamental aim in developing practice guidelines has been to assist psychiatrists in their clinical decision making, with the ultimate goal of improving the care of patients. The explosion of knowledge in our field over the last several decades amplifies the value of these guidelines. Furthermore, the current health care climate is characterized by concerns about quality of care, access to care, and cost. Efforts to respond to these problems by exerting external control over the types and amount of care that can be provided have led to new concerns about the quality of the data on which such efforts are based and the process by which the data are used to determine “appropriate” or “reimbursable” care. The realization that both treatment and reimbursement decisions are occurring without systematic scientific and clinical input has led the APA, along with many other medical specialty societies, to accelerate the process of documenting clearly and concisely what is known and what is not known about the treatment of patients. Although there are a number of other groups, including the federal and state governments, managed care organizations, and care delivery systems, that are also developing practice guidelines, the APA has decided that the psychiatric profession should take the lead in describing the best treatments and the range of appropriate treatments available to patients with mental illnesses.

How Are Practice Guidelines Developed?

The APA practice guidelines are developed under the direction of the Steering Committee on Practice Guidelines. The process is designed to ensure the development of reliable and valid guidelines and is consistent with the recommendations of the American Medical Association and the Institute of Medicine. It is characterized by rigorous scientific review of the available literature, widespread review of iterative drafts, and ultimate approval by the APA Assembly and Board of Trustees. The APA is committed to revising the guidelines at 5-year intervals. A revision may be accelerated if there is substantial new evidence suggesting a change in preferred treatment approaches. The development process is fully described here. Between guideline revisions, “guideline watches” highlight significant developments relevant to specific guideline recommendations. As they are completed, watches are made available online here at www.PsychiatryOnline.com. Psychiatrists who use the guidelines are advised to check the web site periodically to stay informed about important developments that may affect how they decide to implement guideline recommendations in their clinical practice.

What Are the Potential Benefits of This Project?

Ultimately, the aim of practice guidelines is to improve patient care. Guidelines should help practicing psychiatrists determine what is known today about how best to help their patients. In addition, psychiatrists and those charged with the allocation of health care resources must try to make the best possible decisions on the basis of currently available data. Well-developed guidelines can help in these efforts.

Toward the end of helping patients, guidelines can have other beneficial effects. They are a vehicle for educating psychiatrists, other medical and mental health professionals, and the general public about appropriate and inappropriate treatments. By demonstrating that the quality of evidence for psychiatric treatments is on par with (and in many cases exceeds) that for other medical care, guidelines contribute to the credibility of the field. Guidelines identify those areas in which critical information is lacking and in which research could be expected to improve clinical decisions. Finally, guidelines can help those charged with overseeing the utilization and reimbursement of psychiatric services to develop more scientifically based and clinically sensitive criteria.

What Are the Possible Risks?

The APA reasons that the risks of this project are small and are considerably outweighed by the benefits. One risk is that the guidelines can be misinterpreted and misused by third parties in a way that will ultimately harm patients. Although this risk rightfully concerns many psychiatrists, it is the judgment of the Steering Committee, the Assembly, and the Board of Trustees that the existence of guidelines helps to clarify the sources of disagreement between treating psychiatrists and reviewers and that their use can be a great improvement over the use of criteria developed through less objective procedures. In addition, many have expressed the concern that guidelines can “homogenize” the care of patients and detract from psychiatrists' freedom to shape treatment in ways that they feel best suit their individual patients. Inevitably, there is a tension in writing guidelines between the desire for specificity and the desire to allow for the consideration of individual clinical circumstances. These concerns must be balanced in such a way that allows psychiatrists to make appropriate clinical decisions. This very important issue is addressed in the Statement of Intent that begins each individually published guideline. Finally, there are concerns that the APA-approved guidelines may lead to an increase in malpractice claims. At this time, legal experts have mixed opinions about the impact of guidelines on the volume and severity of malpractice suits. However, in fact, some medical specialties that have been developing guidelines over the past two decades report that guidelines seem to have had the positive effect of fewer claims and, for at least one specialty (anesthesiology), lower malpractice insurance premiums. Since the publication of APA's first practice guideline in 1993, the Steering Committee has been monitoring the potential impact of the guidelines on malpractice actions and has not noted any trends suggesting an increase in the number or severity of malpractice claims that might be attributed to the existence of APA-approved guidelines.

How Can We Improve the Current Process?

Since the inception of the APA project in 1989, the practice guideline development process has evolved significantly. Specifically, the activities of the work groups developing the guidelines have been made more explicit, and the nature of the reviewers' input has been standardized. Also, the format of each guideline has evolved over the past several years. In guidelines developed after 1999, the recommendations covering treatment, including the formulation of a treatment plan, are presented before background information and the evidence that supports these recommendations. This change in format was based on input from psychiatrists and is designed to make the guidelines more user-friendly.

Certain principles remain crucial to further improvement. Clearly, practice guidelines should be based on objective data whenever possible. Such data are of two types: well-designed research studies and systematically identified clinical expertise. Systematic reviews of the literature are an essential part of this work. However, efforts to synthesize studies in any given area are hampered by the uneven quantity and quality of research, by problems in generalizing from a literature largely derived from tertiary care research settings to more typical clinical practice, by the inherent difficulty in conducting controlled studies of some treatments for some populations, and by the difficulty in characterizing “clinical consensus.” These issues are being partially addressed through the use of the APA's Practice Research Network (PRN), which uses a panel of approximately 800 psychiatrists in the full range of practice settings to gather data for clinical research. Practice research networks are also being used in other areas of medicine (e.g., family practice and pediatrics) to gather data from practice settings of relevance to the development of guidelines. For example, data about prevailing practice patterns and patient outcomes can be systematically gathered and incorporated into the guidelines. In addition, the impact of guidelines on psychiatric practice and patient outcomes can be assessed; ultimately, it should be possible to determine whether guidelines improve patient care. Currently, a major thrust of the APA project is to explore, devise, and test educational and dissemination strategies that will increase psychiatrists' use of the guidelines in daily practice.

Quick Reference Guides

In further attempts to increase the use and usefulness of the practice guidelines, the APA now publishes with each guideline a quick reference guide (QRG). The QRG is a summary of the guideline's major recommendations. The QRG is designed to assist psychiatrists in using the material presented in the full-text guideline.

The idea to develop QRGs resulted from frequent comments by psychiatrists that the length, text format, and comprehensive nature of APA's practice guidelines do not allow for easy use in day-to-day work with patients. Since similar observations have been made for guidelines in many fields of medicine, dissemination and implementation strategies such as the QRGs have become the major foci of guideline projects, including APA's.

The first APA QRG (on major depressive disorder) was developed in 1997 as part of a study in conjunction with RAND Corporation and the New York State Psychiatric Association, with grant support from the New York State Department of Health. The response of psychiatrists using the QRG made clear that it was indeed a helpful tool; thereafter, development of a QRG for each practice guideline became an important component of the APA practice guidelines project.

The main challenge in developing a QRG is to present the major recommendations and their sequencing in enough detail to be clinically helpful and at the same time to limit the document to a usable length.

Central to proper use of these QRGs is recognition that they do not stand alone. The psychiatrist using a QRG will find it helpful to return to the full-text practice guideline for clarification of a recommendation or for a review of the evidence supporting a particular strategy.

An essential feature of good guidelines is that they are revised at regular intervals based on advances in the knowledge base and on input from guideline users. As APA practice guidelines are revised, so will be their corresponding QRGs.

Online CME

Interactive continuing medical education programs for many of the individual practice guidelines are available on the APA's web site (www.psych.org/cme). Each program offers Category 1 CME credits that are accepted by the APA and the American Medical Association.

The American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) has reviewed the APA Practice Guidelines CME Program and has approved this product as part of a comprehensive lifelong learning program, which is mandated by the American Board of Medical Specialties as a necessary component of maintenance of certification.

ABPN approval is time limited to 3 years for each individual Practice Guideline CME course. Refer to APA's CME web site for ABPN approval status of each course.

Conclusions

The practice guidelines represent an important step in the development of an “evidence-based psychiatry.” The development of better research tools, the accumulation of new research data, the systematic identification of best clinical practice, and the iterative improvement of the process for developing practice guidelines will contribute to the continual development of better practice guidelines to aid psychiatrists in their clinical decision making.

Psychiatrists using the Practice Guidelines and Quick Reference Guides are encouraged to submit suggestions for improvement of these tools. A feedback form is available at http://mx.psych.org/survey/reviewform.cfm.
John S. McIntyre, M.D.
   Chair, APA Steering Committee on Practice Guidelines

Sara C. Charles, M.D.
   Vice-Chair, APA Steering Committee on Practice Guidelines

Laura J. Fochtmann, M.D.
   Medical Editor, APA Practice Guidelines and Quick Reference Guides