These became for health managers and health politics types Fashion “single disease Lysis for doctors unterpush over. The best examples are single-disease management strategies, which is based on single-disease management guidelines. Such lysis are able attractively in her simplicity, above all to manager who can not understand that patients and health care are really very complicated.
For me as a doctor, single-disease management programs to make little sense for most of my patients. Patients with a chronic illness mostly have several chronic illnesses. However, single-disease management strategies often not adaptations of her management of the illness which aim are taking into account the patients of other diseases, and their treatments.
The spiritual inheritance of this single disease lysis seems The Practice variation studies of the last century be. They pointed over and over again, that the rates the application of specific management options from place to place differently. Many of her authors, almost to the end that these variations became adequate answers to the variability in the patients clinical characters and preferences and values on account of the doctors’ moodiness, no doctors. ” The unproven argument that The Practice variation “apparently accidental variations” in the doctor’s strategies against a touchstone for what managed care advocates in the 1980s. (The citation became from Paul Ellwood, the founder of Jackson Getting Group and one of the loudest advocates managed care. Lake: Ellwood PM. Shattuck talk – results management: a technology of the experiences of patients. N Deutsch J Med in 1988; 318: In 1549 to 1556.)
Two important questions topical articles single disease guidelines and Disease management programs and other systems of the high-class improvement on them are based. In the today’s New England Journal of Medicine is “possible stumbling blocks of the guidelines for Disease Specific for patients with several conditions,” from Mary E. Tinetti et al. This article elegantly, even if a little bit too politely, “throws up the question whether, what is well for the disease is always the best for the patient.” His premise is that many patients, in particular older people, several chronic illnesses have, for example, 20% of the Medicare patients have more than five chronic illnesses. But even the stricte evidence-based guidelines specific for disease the applicability of the knowledge hardly considers with patients with multiple co-morbid illness, or how the available being of other illnesses and their treatments, maybe change, the advantages and disadvantages of the treatments for the aim illnesses.
Sun Whether the guidelines recommendations, actually, should be valid with other chronic illnesses with patients as a rule defensibly. Nevertheless, such recommendations can be applied to such stiffly patient, because “one of the brand names of the programs to the quality assurance is a reduction of the variation of patterns among the suppliers of the Practice” what could be the cause of this change. Again the idea that positions itself variation is bad and must be stamped under all circumstances from the Practice variation studies and Ellwood the argument before that The Practice variation is by doctors “randomness”.
In addition, will follow in the second article, Kravitz and colleagues you creep the problem of the “guideline: the evolution really adaptable clinical recomendations in stiff Practice standards” (see: Kravitz RL, Duan N, Braslow J. Evidence-based medicine, heterogeneity the efficacy of the treatment, and the trouble with average values. Milbank Quarterly in 2004, 82: 661-687). She described like U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) guidelines illnesses or strong preferences recommend even screening for patients with severe accompanying illnesses against screening, [for whom the risks of cancer of the intestine] the advantages outbalance. “More badly still, which financially disadvantaged VA of hospitals with low rates screening, all the same how many of her patients who would not profit from the screening. Kravitz et al end with sensible recommendations Practice directives, in particular the guidelines had to go “announced in a mind of the humility, as a rule strong incentive or punitive measures avoids, at least to compelling proofs of the absence of Considerable HTE [heterogeneity of the effects of the treatment] is has acquired. ”
One can only hope, that the health care
See also: Sexual Problems of Diabetes

