How Does the SOGC Keep its Recommendations Up to Date?

This is undoubtedly one of the biggest challenges for learned societies! How to survive this duality, as we cannot modify already published clinical guidelines or rewrite them with every new publication, many of which vary in quality, sometimes making recommendations even contradictory. The rapid publication of international recommendations sometimes raises questions that few clinicians can resolve on their own. It is in situations like this that the team excels in its ability to harness the power of the group, the power that ensures that despite the small number of obstetricians and gynaecologists in Canada, we have the privilege of a strong scientific critical mass from coast to coast. We quickly manage to bring together our minds and take positions on Canadian stances, as some recommendations may be influenced by expertise, access and the availability of services within a reasonable timeframe. 

With the team, we are in constant re-evaluation of our policies and processes, allowing us to improve continuously and keep pace. Obstetricians, gynaecologists and their teams are overwhelmed, everywhere in the country, as indicated by our survey, and we clearly intend to help you at this level. Over the past year, we have strengthened the scientific research team by adding a PhD position, an MD-PhD, and a process specialist. This new team, still under the leadership of Dr. Jocelynn Cook, helps us release new studies and evaluate the ever-evolving evidence. We also do real-time updates on the publications of our sister societies, with whom we have established a true collaboration. We are exploring ways to share our literature reviews with them to enhance agility in revising and writing our clinical guidelines and to reduce costs. 

A great example of this continuous evaluation is as follows: we were questioned about our recommendations in Clinical Guideline No. 448, Prevention of Rh D Alloimmunization. We then set the process in motion, reviewed the scientific evidence, the recommendations of sister societies, gathered the authors of these guidelines, added new experts since the creation of this group, considered the recommendations of the 3 discussion panels in 2024: ACSC Edmonton, FMC Quebec and CME Ontario and reviewed our recommendations, which you will find in the appendix. We clarified the ambiguities but still left room for personal discussion around informed consent and shared decision-making when the absence of zero risk turns into anxiety for patients. 

Our experts on this specific topic thrive on your recognition. Thank them when you see them; we all benefit from it: 

Dr. Karen Fung-Kee-Fung 
Dr. Karen Wong 
Dr. Jennifer Walsh 
Dr. Candyce Hamel 
Dr. Gwen Clarke 
Dr. Sebastian Hobson 

This is a transparent and elegant way to clarify the gray areas, and that is why we thank all the members who question us. Our expert colleagues are always willing to be questioned and shine through their commitment to finding solutions that will make your daily work easier. Finally, we have given ourselves the means by building a strong team that tackles the latest evidence, enabling us to start our discussions more quickly. 

As usual, we recommend documenting your records if you disagree with the guidelines, as anyone who has been to court knows that they are used as references. 

Want to participate in this new way of doing things? Make your expertise known by joining the clinical committees and come and share your knowledge at our conferences and continuing education sessions. Canada is full of great minds and meticulous people who help us provide you with this highly relevant content! 

The power of the group…  

Dr. Diane Francoeur 
FRCSC, MHCM, ICD.D
Chief Executive Officer