Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;330:309 (5 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7486.309
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORIn recent years many clinical guidelines on hypertension have been published. While recommendations have often varied, hypertension guidelines share two features: all have generated controversy and been poorly implemented. Recent criticisms of hypertension guidelines by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE)1 and the British Hypertension Society (BHS),2 show that the first phenomenon is continuing to happen. Can the second be prevented?
Two developments indicate that it can.
Firstly, there is now international agreement on what constitutes a good guideline.3 Developers are encouraged to address the perspective of their target professionals, particularly assessing the resource impact of their recommendations. Both issues were at the heart of the criticisms of the BHS guidelines.2 NICE takes into account evidence of cost effectiveness as well as clinical effectiveness, which is the main reason the NICE recommendations differ from those of the BHS. However, they are not as dissimilar as Poulter says
Peter Littlejohns, clinical director
Peter.littlejohns@nice.nhs.uk, National Institute for Clinical Excellence, London WC1V 6NA
Gillian Leng, implementation systems director, Andrea Sutcliffe, planning and resources director
National Institute for Clinical Excellence, London WC1V 6NA
Read all Rapid Responses