Workshop on Standards for Clinical Practice Guidelines Institute of Medicine January 11, 2010 Vivian H. Coates, Vice President, ECRI Project Director,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Evidence-based Dental Practice Developing guidelines or clinical recommendations Slide #1 This lecture follows the previous online lecture on evidence.
Advertisements

1 Understanding How the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Works USPSTF 101.
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Member.
Synthesizing the evidence on the relationship between education, health and social capital Dan Sherman, PhD American Institutes for Research 25 February,
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Co-Chair.
Improving how your organisation supports the use of research evidence to inform policymaking.
Assessing the Impact of the IOM Report on the Future of the National Guideline Clearinghouse Richard N. Shiffman, MD, MCIS Yale School of Medicine New.
Participation Requirements for a Patient Representative.
April 2009 Netta Conyers-Haynes, Principal Consultant, Communications Kaiser Permanente National Guideline Program Implications of IOM SR Standards Wiley.
Mary Barton, MD, MPP Vice President, Performance Measures “Balancing scientific and social dimensions of guidelines”
Searching for the Best Evidence Liz Bayley Health Sciences Library Evidence Informed Decision Making Workshop May 3, 2011.
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel PGIN Representative.
Knowing What Works in Health Care : A Roadmap for the Nation Alliance for Health Reform April 4, 2008 Wilhelmine Miller, MS, PhD GWU SPHHS.
April 2009 Netta Conyers-Haynes, Principal Consultant, Communications Kaiser Permanente National Guideline Program (NGP): Implications of IOM CPG Standards.
Publishing qualitative studies H Maisonneuve April 2015 Edinburgh, Scotland.
Accessing Sources Of Evidence For Practice Introduction To Databases Karen Smith Department of Health Sciences University of York.
Implementation Survey Results – Systematic Review Questions Next Steps: Implementation Workshop on Standards for Systematic Reviews and Clinical Practice.
Tobacco Cessation and Private Insurance under ACA: New Opportunities for Public Health September 25, 2014.
Systematic Reviews and the American Academy of Pediatrics Virginia A. Moyer, MD, MPH Professor of Pediatrics Baylor College of Medicine.
NCCN and NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology™
Chapter 7. Getting Closer: Grading the Literature and Evaluating the Strength of the Evidence.
 Research Objectives o Evaluate the state of diabetes quality measurement, utilization & impact o Determine key strengths, weaknesses, gaps o Develop.
From Evidence to EMS Practice: Building the National Model Eddy Lang, MD, CFPC (EM), CSPQ SMBD-Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Montreal, Canada.
Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines
Performance Measurement and Analysis for Health Organizations
Why Use MONAHRQ for Health Care Reporting? May 2014 Note: This is one of seven slide sets outlining MONAHRQ and its value, available at
Best Practices: Standing on the Shoulders of Giants? Ronnie Detrich Wing Institute.
Systematic Reviews.
Collaboration Challenges: Inter- Organizational Guideline Forum (IOGF) Craig W. Robbins, MD, MPH KP Care Management Institute-Medical Director, Center.
Summary of ICIUM Chronic Care Track Prepared by: Ricardo Perez-Cuevas Veronika Wirtz David Beran.
Copyright © 2006 Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved Chapter 24 Using Nursing Research in Practice.
Copyright © 2012 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 2 Evidence-Based Nursing: Translating Research Evidence Into Practice.
1 Copyright © 2011 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier Inc. Chapter 13 Building an Evidence-Based Nursing Practice.
ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines: Consensus Conference (CC) SOP Edited by EDC-SC September 2013.
Systematic Review Module 7: Rating the Quality of Individual Studies Meera Viswanathan, PhD RTI-UNC EPC.
Session I: Unit 2 Types of Reviews September 26, 2007 NCDDR training course for NIDRR grantees: Developing Evidence-Based Products Using the Systematic.
Component 11/Unit 8b Data Dictionary Understanding and Development.
What Works Clearinghouse Susan Sanchez Institute of Education Sciences.
Finding Relevant Evidence
TIGER Standards & Interoperability Collaborative
Systematic reviews to support public policy: An overview Jeff Valentine University of Louisville AfrEA – NONIE – 3ie Cairo.
TEACH: LEVEL II – CLINICAL POLICIES AND GUIDELINES STREAM TEACH Plenary NYAM August 8 th, 2012 Craig A Umscheid, MD, MSCE, FACP Assistant Professor of.
TEACH LEVEL II: CLINICAL POLICIES AND GUIDELINES STREAM Craig A Umscheid, MD, MSCE, FACP Assistant Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology Director, Center.
Evidence-Based Medicine Presentation [Insert your name here] [Insert your designation here] [Insert your institutional affiliation here] Department of.
Next Steps: Implementation Workshop on Standards for Systematic Reviews and Clinical Practice Guidelines Institute of Medicine Sandra Zelman Lewis, PhD.
Evidence-Based Medicine: What does it really mean? Sports Medicine Rounds November 7, 2007.
META-ANALYSIS, RESEARCH SYNTHESES AND SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS © LOUIS COHEN, LAWRENCE MANION & KEITH MORRISON.
Standards for Systematic Reviews of Clinical Effectiveness Research Standards for Systematic Reviews of Clinical Effectiveness Research Institute of Medicine.
Impact of Two Studies on Future of NGC AHRQ Annual Conf Sept 19, :30 – 3:00pm.
Systematic Reviews and American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guidelines Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, MHA, FACP Director, Clinical Policy American College.
Implementing the GRADE Method in Guideline Development: Real- World Experiences Contemplation Stage: To GRADE or Not to GRADE? Sheila A. Agyeman, MHA Director.
Implementing a new drug or technique (APA Cambridge 21. June 2013) Tom G. Hansen, MD, PhD, Department of Anaesthesia & Intensive Care Odense University.
Developing evidence-based guidelines at WHO. Evidence-based guidelines at WHO | January 17, |2 |
Component 1: Introduction to Health Care and Public Health in the U.S. 1.9: Unit 9: The evolution and reform of healthcare in the US 1.9a: Evidence Based.
Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 17 Clinical Practice Guidelines and Clinical Prediction Rules.
Guidelines Recommandations. Role Ideal mediator for bridging between research findings and actual clinical practice Ideal tool for professionals, managers,
Evidence Based Practice (EBP) Riphah College of Rehabilitation Sciences(RCRS) Riphah International University Islamabad.
Institute of Medicine Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines Washington, DC January 11, 2010 Marguerite Koster,
Evidence-Based Dentistry Presenter’s Name. What does EBD mean?
Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) and Patient- Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) Presentation Developed for the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy.
EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE ATHANASIA KOSTOPOULOU ERASMUS IPs
Systematic Reviews of Evidence Introduction & Applications AEA 2014 Claire Morgan Senior Research Associate, WestEd.
Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines Institute of Medicine.
Building an Evidence-Based Nursing Practice
Systematic Review, Synthesis, & Clinical Practice Guidelines
WHO Guideline development
Presentation Developed for the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
GUIDELINE COLLABORATION Clinical Practice Guidelines, Development and Implementation in Mexico: International Forum Sandra Zelman Lewis, PhD November.
Presentation Developed for the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
Presentation transcript:

Workshop on Standards for Clinical Practice Guidelines Institute of Medicine January 11, 2010 Vivian H. Coates, Vice President, ECRI Project Director, NGC and NQMC

National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) NGC and its sister National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC) sponsored by U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) NGC and its sister National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC) sponsored by U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Mary Nix, Clearinghouse Administrator Mary Nix, Clearinghouse Administrator Since 1997, ECRI contractor to AHRQ to create and maintain NGC; since 2001, contractor for NQMC Since 1997, ECRI contractor to AHRQ to create and maintain NGC; since 2001, contractor for NQMC ECRI EPC also provides methodology support to federal and private sector CPG developers ECRI EPC also provides methodology support to federal and private sector CPG developers

NGC Perspective - Overview of all CPGs Maintain relationships with hundreds of guideline developers from many countries Maintain relationships with hundreds of guideline developers from many countries Produce structured abstracts of thousands of guidelines, taking note of underlying methodology used to develop each guideline Produce structured abstracts of thousands of guidelines, taking note of underlying methodology used to develop each guideline Author guideline syntheses – in depth comparisons of areas of agreement and difference across multiple guidelines on same topic Author guideline syntheses – in depth comparisons of areas of agreement and difference across multiple guidelines on same topic Maintain relational database and website ( Maintain relational database and website ( Currently, NGC contains more than 2500 guidelines from more than 200 developers, and has reviewed nearly 8000 guidelines Currently, NGC contains more than 2500 guidelines from more than 200 developers, and has reviewed nearly 8000 guidelines

NGC Perspective - Overview of all CPGs NGC template of attributes a widely used tool for understanding important guideline characteristics NGC template of attributes a widely used tool for understanding important guideline characteristics Facilitates understanding and critical appraisal of guideline quality and rigor Facilitates understanding and critical appraisal of guideline quality and rigor Important attributes include: guideline scope, methods used to collect and analyze evidence, formulate and validate recommendations, panel characteristics, financial and other disclosures Important attributes include: guideline scope, methods used to collect and analyze evidence, formulate and validate recommendations, panel characteristics, financial and other disclosures

NGC Perspective - Overview of all CPGs New in 2009: research project underway by ECRI’s NGC team to explore feasibility of using Guideline Elements Model (GEM) to process clinical guidelines to facilitate their use in clinical decision support (CDS) information systems at the point of care New in 2009: research project underway by ECRI’s NGC team to explore feasibility of using Guideline Elements Model (GEM) to process clinical guidelines to facilitate their use in clinical decision support (CDS) information systems at the point of care Many guideline recommendations statements are vague and not “actionable” (decidable and executable), and therefore cannot readily be implemented into CDS or electronic health record (EHR) systems Many guideline recommendations statements are vague and not “actionable” (decidable and executable), and therefore cannot readily be implemented into CDS or electronic health record (EHR) systems In general, the 2500 guidelines in NGC vary widely in methodologic rigor: In general, the 2500 guidelines in NGC vary widely in methodologic rigor: Comprehensive, transparent, well-documented Comprehensive, transparent, well-documented “Evidence-light”, poorly documented “Evidence-light”, poorly documented

Challenges for CPG Developers and Users Recommendation statements that are vague or ambiguous may be due to deficiencies in underlying evidence – Developer may not be able to formulate explicit recommendations. Recommendation statements that are vague or ambiguous may be due to deficiencies in underlying evidence – Developer may not be able to formulate explicit recommendations. Guidelines often conflict: differences in evidence interpretation, but also because of differences in approaches to evidence synthesis ( eg, narrative review vs full systematic review),different developer perspectives (eg. primary care vs specialty; health plan vs provider). NGC identifies at least 25 different conditions for which conflicting guidelines exist. Guidelines often conflict: differences in evidence interpretation, but also because of differences in approaches to evidence synthesis ( eg, narrative review vs full systematic review),different developer perspectives (eg. primary care vs specialty; health plan vs provider). NGC identifies at least 25 different conditions for which conflicting guidelines exist. Complex patients with multiple co-morbidities not well addressed by most guidelines. Complex patients with multiple co-morbidities not well addressed by most guidelines.

Other Challenges for CPG Developers Resource and time constraints Resource and time constraints many orgs cannot afford to undertake an indepth evidence synthesis (eg, using full GRADE approach) many orgs cannot afford to undertake an indepth evidence synthesis (eg, using full GRADE approach) updating existing guidelines: many developers unable to do this in a timely way updating existing guidelines: many developers unable to do this in a timely way Need for education of less sophisticated developers in how best to conduct evidence reviews Need for education of less sophisticated developers in how best to conduct evidence reviews Available funding sources may lead to actual bias or perception of bias Available funding sources may lead to actual bias or perception of bias Guideline committees may be subject to undue influence by individuals (“eminence-based medicine”) Guideline committees may be subject to undue influence by individuals (“eminence-based medicine”)

Additional Challenges for Users of Guidelines Represented in NGC Lack of disclosure in CPGs about financial and other conflicts of interest is common Lack of disclosure in CPGs about financial and other conflicts of interest is common Lack of documentation in CPG about the details of methodologic approaches used is common Lack of documentation in CPG about the details of methodologic approaches used is common Lack of any detail about composition of guideline panel is common Lack of any detail about composition of guideline panel is common Lack of awareness on part of guideline developers of what is needed by quality measure developers (eg, what data sources will document whether a guideline recommendation was used for a specific patient) Lack of awareness on part of guideline developers of what is needed by quality measure developers (eg, what data sources will document whether a guideline recommendation was used for a specific patient)

Additional Challenges for Users of Guidelines Represented in NGC Lack of awareness by CPG developers of how to facilitate uptake of their guidelines into clinical decision support systems (CDS) and EHRs Lack of awareness by CPG developers of how to facilitate uptake of their guidelines into clinical decision support systems (CDS) and EHRs Delay/long time frames for release/publication of many guidelines means that the evidence on which they are based is outdated before implementation phase begins Delay/long time frames for release/publication of many guidelines means that the evidence on which they are based is outdated before implementation phase begins

Suggestions for Composition of Panel Guidelines for conditions requiring multidisciplinary approaches should have multidisciplinary panel composition Guidelines for conditions requiring multidisciplinary approaches should have multidisciplinary panel composition Nonphysician perspectives (esp. nursing) often helpful Nonphysician perspectives (esp. nursing) often helpful Include individual trained in EBM from a patient advocacy perspective, rather than simply a consumer rep Include individual trained in EBM from a patient advocacy perspective, rather than simply a consumer rep Include a quality improvement expert, if QM are to be developed from the guideline Include a quality improvement expert, if QM are to be developed from the guideline Include a clinical informatics expert, if CPG recommendations are to be actionable and implementable in CDS and EHR systems Include a clinical informatics expert, if CPG recommendations are to be actionable and implementable in CDS and EHR systems

Other Issues to Consider: There is currently no consensus on what constitutes a “good” guideline. A guideline may recommend interventions and practices that are based on good evidence, but be poorly worded so that the recommendations are unclear or not implementable in a CDS. The reverse is also true. There is currently no consensus on what constitutes a “good” guideline. A guideline may recommend interventions and practices that are based on good evidence, but be poorly worded so that the recommendations are unclear or not implementable in a CDS. The reverse is also true. NGC identifies more than 40 attributes of guidelines. Guidelines for which key information is “Not stated” may contain evidence-based, implementable recommendations, but lack transparency about the underlying methodology and processes. NGC identifies more than 40 attributes of guidelines. Guidelines for which key information is “Not stated” may contain evidence-based, implementable recommendations, but lack transparency about the underlying methodology and processes.

Other Issues to Consider: Most of the developers whose guidelines are represented in NGC (158 of 204; 77%) use some sort of rating scheme to grade the underlying evidence and/or strength of the recommendations. Most of the developers whose guidelines are represented in NGC (158 of 204; 77%) use some sort of rating scheme to grade the underlying evidence and/or strength of the recommendations. Of these, 10 developers report using GRADE or modified GRADE Of these, 10 developers report using GRADE or modified GRADE 6 report using the USPSTF approach, either as is, or modified 6 report using the USPSTF approach, either as is, or modified The great majority (142 developers) do not identify the origin of their rating schemes, and appear to be using schemes unique to their organizations. The great majority (142 developers) do not identify the origin of their rating schemes, and appear to be using schemes unique to their organizations. A more consistent approach implemented by CPG developers would be very helpful. A more consistent approach implemented by CPG developers would be very helpful.