Cross-sectional analysis of guidelines on cardiovascular disease risk factors: Going to meet the inconsistencies

Objective. To identify the possible inconsistency of statements among the practice guidelines of the Dutch College of General Practitioners (DCGP) with respect to the management of risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods. Cross-sectional analysis of all electronically available DCGP practice guidelines dealing with CVD risk factor management for statement inconsistencies and reference inconsistencies. Results. Six DCGP guidelines out of 74 electronically available guidelines had either CVD or CVD risk factors as the subject of the guideline. Eight statement inconsistencies were found, and for each statement inconsistency, a reference inconsistency was present. Conclusions. Given that inconsistencies were found, the authors recommend that organizations that maintain a set of guidelines update the guidelines using a cross-sectional analysis of guidelines. Inconsistencies between guidelines might lead to physicians being unintentionally noncompliant with guideline recommendations.