So far, a practical way of comparing clinical guidelines proving their reliability before their implementation is still needed to validate any guideline program [ 8].
This resulted in the addition of a sixth guideline program, published by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (CSP) [ 28].
These guidelines, based on scientific evidence, broad consensus, and clinical evidence, are developed and implemented by the Dutch College of General Practitioners as part of a national guideline program operational since 1987 [ 15].
Further comparison showed that all guideline programs perform systematic literature searches to identify the available evidence.
The AGREE Collaboration found a 9 point advantage in this domain for guidelines developed within a guideline development program and 19 points for those developed as national initiatives.
The aim of this study is to compare a selection of different guideline development programs in detail and to use these findings to review the previous KNGF guideline program in the Netherlands.
The results are used to update the KNGF guideline program.
Detailed comparison of the different guideline programs was used for updating the KNGF guideline program, which reflects international consensus and describes explicit choices in those issues lacking consensus.
To evaluate the previous Dutch guideline program in physical therapy we also used the AGREE criteria.
Purpose of this study is to compare different guideline development programs and review the KNGF guideline program for physical therapy in the Netherlands, in order to update the program.
