title: [Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of schizophrenia: from theory to practice].
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Based on the concept of evidence-based medicine (EBM), the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) occupy an increasingly important place in the field of the treatment of schizophrenia. Although CPGs have been elaborated in a rigorous way, few of them provide the readers with tools for their use in practice. The clinician must therefore create his own method of application. This problem was encountered within the framework of a retrospective study carried out in a rehabilitation unit, where we sought to answer the question concerning the use of the CPG approach in the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: "to what degree do doctors, with only indirect knowledge, respect these CPGs?"
  
  
  METHODS
  The comparative study between CPG and practical current clinic implied: (1) the choice of a pertinent CPG for the clinical framework studied, (2) the selection of measuring instruments, which allow the quantification of obvious clinical problems approached in the CPG, and (3) the development of a standardized system of comparison to determine the degree of respect of the recommendations. The Expert Consensus Guideline for the treatment of schizophrenia (ECGTS) was selected as the reference. A method of application of the ECGTS is depicted: use of standardized clinical scales; translation of the results of the clinical examination in terms of clinical problems to which the recommendations of the guideline refers; and determination of the degree of respect of the recommendations.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the group of 20 patients included in this study, the recommendations of the ECGTS were totally respected in 65% of the patients, and partially respected in 10%, while in 25% of the patients, they were not respected.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  These observations suggest that the clinical approach has to be improved, mainly with regard to the treatment of psychotic and depressive symptoms. This work also showed the limits of the CPG: for example, over half of the patients presented side effects on clinical evaluation, whereas the regulation of their medication respected the recommendations of the ECGTS.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The future certainly belongs to CPG, which proposes, in addition to the clinical recommendations themselves, a method to check their application in clinical practice.
authors.affiliation: Service de médecine et psychiatrie pénitentiaires, département de psychiatrie, centre hospitalier universitaire vaudois, université de Lausanne, site de Cery, 1008 Prilly, Suisse. didier.delessert@chuv.ch
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Delessert
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Pomini
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Grasset
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Baumann
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D014150:Antipsychotic Agents / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians'; D011582:Psychological Theory; D012559:Schizophrenia / Q000628:therapy*
chemical_list: D014150:Antipsychotic Agents