[Guidelines: some considerations on one of the cultural instruments on which the switch in the National Health System...

In the last few years there has been an explosion of interest in guidelines, reflected in a vivid debate in the international literature. Guidelines for medical practice are not innovative tools, since their history began at least 20 years ago. They are produced with increasing frequency in North America, and similar developments are taking place in Europe. The concept of improving the quality of the services in the National Health System through the production and implementation of valid clinical guidelines has been recognized in Italy by the Ministry of Health, who introduced such a concept in the last reform of the law on the Sanitary Health System. Many international authors deem that clinical guidelines are a way to support effective clinical practice. If this still holds, and we believe it does, then we must ensure that these guidelines are effective. Also for the enthusiast, the entire process from the development to the dissemination, implementation, and evaluation is not an easy task. Guidelines should be written correctly by a multidisciplinary panel of experts, should be peer reviewed and updated. Guidelines should become the common field in which the four major parties of the sanitary "market" (a market far from ideal today) meet: the patient, the doctor, the manager, and the industry involved in medical technology. Guidelines should be disseminated and implemented: simply having evidence available does not necessarily mean that it will be used. Thus, the key question is not so much related to the acceptance of best practice, but the extent to which a guideline is cost-effective. In this review we have tried to discuss such points, taking into consideration all the steps, the discussions, the controversial points, and the unsolved questions which are smoldering under both the potential benefit of practice guidelines (also in the light of appropriateness of medical practice), and all the possible effects on clinical autonomy, health care costs, clinical practice satisfaction, legal implications, and conflicts of interest. It is crucial for medical associations, and indeed for all physicians, to take up this problem and constructively try to play an active part in the process, avoiding the possibility that controversial guidelines be imposed by the regulatory authorities.