Clinical practice guidelines in psychiatry: more confusion than clarity? A critical review and recommendation of a unified guideline

Saddichha, Sahoo and Chaturvedi, Santosh K. (2014) Clinical practice guidelines in psychiatry: more confusion than clarity? A critical review and recommendation of a unified guideline. ISRN Psychiatry, 2014 828917. doi:10.1155/2014/828917


Author Saddichha, Sahoo
Chaturvedi, Santosh K.
Title Clinical practice guidelines in psychiatry: more confusion than clarity? A critical review and recommendation of a unified guideline
Journal name ISRN Psychiatry
ISSN 2090-7966
Publication date 2014-03-31
Year available 2014
Sub-type Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
DOI 10.1155/2014/828917
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 2014
Start page 828917
Total pages 8
Place of publication New York, NY, United States
Publisher Hindawi
Language eng
Abstract The discipline of psychiatry has a plethora of guidelines, designed to serve the needs of the clinician. Yet, even a cursory glance is enough to discern the differences between the various guidelines. This paper reviews the current standard guidelines being followed across the world and proposes a unified guideline on the backbone of current evidence and practice being followed. The algorithm for pharmacological and psychosocial treatment for bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, and schizophrenia is formulated after cross-comparison across four different guidelines and recent meta-analytical evidence. For every disorder, guidelines have different suggestions. Hence, based on the current status of evidence, algorithms have been combined to form a unified guideline for management. Clinical practice guidelines form the basis of standard clinical practice for all disciplines of medicine, including psychiatry. Yet, they are often not read or followed because of poor quality or because of barriers to implementation due to either lack of agreement or ambiguity. A unified guideline can go a long way in helping clear some of the confusion that has crept in due to the use of different guidelines across the world.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
Collection: Faculty of Medicine
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 15 Nov 2017, 13:51:24 EST