Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center1.

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

Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Member.
Study Objectives and Questions for Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
Protocol Development.
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Co-Chair.
Donald T. Simeon Caribbean Health Research Council
Participation Requirements for a Patient Representative.
Carrol Gamble Jenny Newman Heather Bagley Bec Hanley.
Philip M. Ullrich, Ph.D. Spinal Cord Injury QUERI IRC Philip M. Ullrich, Ph.D. Spinal Cord Injury QUERI IRC Philip M. Ullrich, Ph.D. Spinal Cord Injury.
Evidence Synthesis for Quality Improvement Purposes Davina Allen Nursing & Midwifery Studies.
Michelle O’Reilly. Quantitative research is outcomes driven Qualitative research is process driven Please offer up your definitions.
Teaching/Learning Strategies to Support Evidence-Based Practice Asoc. prof. Vida Staniuliene Klaipeda State College Dean of Faculty of Health Sciences.
Enhancing Data Quality of Distributive Trade Statistics Workshop for African countries on the Implementation of International Recommendations for Distributive.
Authors and affiliation Research, University of Sheffield, 3 East Midlands Ambulance Service Study flow Conclusion In addition to measures relating to.
Program Evaluation and Measurement Janet Myers. Objectives for today… To define and explain concepts and terms used in program evaluation. To understand.
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel PGIN Representative.
Chapter Three: Determining Program Components by David Agnew Arkansas State University.
Cancer Disparities Research Partnership Program Process & Outcome Evaluation Amanda Greene, PhD, MPH, RN Paul Young, MBA, MPH Natalie Stultz, MS NOVA Research.
Chapter 7. Getting Closer: Grading the Literature and Evaluating the Strength of the Evidence.
Choosing Your Primary Research Method What do you need to find out that your literature did not provide?
From Evidence to EMS Practice: Building the National Model Eddy Lang, MD, CFPC (EM), CSPQ SMBD-Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Montreal, Canada.
Conducting the IT Audit
Developing Research Proposal Systematic Review Mohammed TA, Omar Ph.D. PT Rehabilitation Health Science.
Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines
STUDY PLANNING & DESIGN TO ENHANCE TRANSLATION OF HEALTH BEHAVIOR RESEARCH Lisa Klesges, Russell Glasgow, Paul Estabrooks, David Dzewaltowski, Sheana Bull.
Darren A. DeWalt, MD, MPH Division of General Internal Medicine Maihan B. Vu, Dr.PH, MPH Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention University.
LEARNING DIFFERENCES - AGENCY SELF-ASSESSMENT GUIDE Program Year A tool for identifying program improvement and professional development needs.
Presenter-Dr. L.Karthiyayini Moderator- Dr. Abhishek Raut
Performance Measurement and Analysis for Health Organizations
Copyright © 2008 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 12 Undertaking Research for Specific Purposes.
Sina Keshavaarz M.D Public Health &Preventive Medicine Measuring level of performance & sustaining improvement.
Slide 1 D2.TCS.CL5.04. Subject Elements This unit comprises five Elements: 1.Define the need for tourism product research 2.Develop the research to be.
The Audit Process Tahera Chaudry March Clinical audit A quality improvement process that seeks to improve patient care and outcomes through systematic.
Systematic Reviews.
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION Conditions of Work and Employment Programme (TRAVAIL) 2012 Module 13: Assessing Maternity Protection in practice Maternity.
Introduction to MAST Kristian Kidholm Odense University Hospital, Denmark.
Evidence Based Medicine Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Ross Lawrenson.
TEACH LEVEL II: CLINICAL POLICIES AND GUIDELINES STREAM Craig A Umscheid, MD, MSCE, FACP Assistant Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology Director, Center.
Copyright 2012 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. Chapter 9 Improving Quality in Health Care Organizations.
BMH CLINICAL GUIDELINES IN EUROPE. OUTLINE Background to the project Objectives The AGREE Instrument: validation process and results Outcomes.
Copyright  2005 McGraw-Hill Australia Pty Ltd PPTs t/a Australian Human Resources Management by Jeremy Seward and Tim Dein Slides prepared by Michelle.
CIFOR Council to Improve Foodborne Outbreak Response CIFOR Guidelines and CIFOR Toolkit Donald J. Sharp, MD, DTM&H Food Safety Office National Center for.
Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation Using the AGREE¹ Instrument CAN-IMPLEMENT Toolkit Version 1.0 April 2010 Modified from:
Adapting Guidelines for Local Implementation: Fusion Cuisine or Fast Food Leftovers Eddy Lang MDCM CCFP(EM) Head Department of Emergency Medicine Senior.
Standard 10: Preventing Falls and Harm from Falls Accrediting Agencies Surveyor Workshop, 13 August 2012.
SINGING FROM THE SAME HYMN SHEET Address to SATS Study Day 29 June 2013 Dr Sue Armstrong.
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :呂宥達 Date : 2005/10/27.
1 The project is financed from the European Union funds within the framework of Erasmus+, Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of.
Journal Club Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Health: Current Evidence November-December 2012.
Guidelines Recommandations. Role Ideal mediator for bridging between research findings and actual clinical practice Ideal tool for professionals, managers,
John N. Lavis, MD, PhD Professor and Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Transfer and Exchange McMaster University Program in Policy Decision-Making McMaster.
Evidence Based Practice (EBP) Riphah College of Rehabilitation Sciences(RCRS) Riphah International University Islamabad.
A framework to improve evidence-informed decision-making in health service management Ph.D Candidate in Health Care Management Tabriz University of Medical.
A Professional Development Series from the CDC’s Division of Population Health School Health Branch Professional Development 101: The Basics – Part 1.
ICAJ/PAB - Improving Compliance with International Standards on Auditing Planning an audit of financial statements 19 July 2014.
Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) and Patient- Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) Presentation Developed for the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy.
Methods: The project used a mixed methods approach including qualitative focus groups, a questionnaire study and systematic searches of the research literature.
Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-based Healthcare resources Roger Tritton: Senior Publisher, ProQuest.
Texas State University – School of Health Administration Mask, A., Ris, M., Case, A., Kruse, C.S., PhD Barriers to the Adoption of Health Information Technology.
PRAGMATIC Study Designs: Elderly Cancer Trials
Clinical Quality Improvement: Achieving BP Control
Supplementary Table 1. PRISMA checklist
Quality Health Care Nursing 870
Reading Research Papers-A Basic Guide to Critical Analysis
Presentation Developed for the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
HOW TO WRITE A SYSTEMATIC/NARRATIVE REVIEW
Measuring Data Quality and Compilation of Metadata
STEPS Site Report.
Surgical re-excision versus observation for histologically dysplastic nevi: a systematic review of associated clinical outcomes K.T. Vuong1, J. Walker2,
Presentation Developed for the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
Presentation transcript:

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center1

2 How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability Anna R Gagliardi, Melissa C Brouwers, Valerie A Palda, Louise Lemieux- Charles and Jeremy M Grimshaw Implementation Science 2011, 6:26

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center3 Introduction  Guidelines continue to be underutilized.  Few developers implemented their own guidelines, had dedicated implementation staff, or evaluated use of their guidelines. Many believed that target users should be responsible for implementation

Cont.  Barriers, Strategies and facilitating of guideline use.  Research suggests that individual clinicians value an easy-to-use format, evidence clarity and validity, details about competency and training requirements, how to blend experience with evidence engage patients in shared decision making Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center4

Cont.  Guideline format and content may be important aspects of implementability that may influence use.  It may be easier to modify the content and format of guidelines rather than the clinical complexity of the recommendations.  To date, there has not been a systematic analysis of guideline features that may improve their use Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center5

Cont.  Modifying guideline features represents an alternative  Purpose : identify and define features  Examine how they are included in current guidelines Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center6

Methods Two key phases:  The first phase: develop an implementability framework of guideline format  The second phase: use the framework assembled in phase one to examine the content of current practice guidelines Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center7

Development of an implementability framework  Based on a modified meta-narrative approach  More suitable than a systematic review for conceptually examining literature that may be limited in quantity and quality, and vary in disciplinary focus and study design.  Modified approach that focused on healthcare literature rather than other disciplines, but were inclusive of a variety of study designs. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center8

Soc Sci Med.Soc Sci Med Jul;61(2): Epub 2005 Jan 26. Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: a meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Greenhalgh TGreenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P Kyriakidou O, Peacock R.Robert GMacfarlane FBate PKyriakidou OPeacock R Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center9

Development of an implementability framework  Performed searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1996 to August  Broad search strategy based on few terms (practice guidelines as topic AND guideline adherence AND attitude of health personnel or decision making, organizational or policy making)  Quantitative (meta-analyses, surveys, observational studies, randomized trials) or qualitative (reviews/ conceptual analyses, interviews, focus groups) studies, English language peer-reviewed journals Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center10

Development of an implementability framework  Eligible: describing guideline features desired by, or influencing the knowledge, decision making, or behaviour of health professionals.  Ineligible: focused on guideline in formed tools such as clinical pathways; guidelines for non-medical interventions; clinical effectiveness of medical interventions; investigated guideline use without examining views about guideline features that influenced use; concluded that guideline features could be improved to promote their use without evaluating those features Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center11

Development of an implementability framework  Quality assessment of studies was not undertaken to be inclusive of all relevant implementability elements.  Tabulated list included the features of guidelines identified in each study as desirable or influencing guideline use.  From this list, common items were categorized and defined. Findings were reviewed independently, and as a group by the study team, which included individuals with clinical, management, and research perspectives; Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center12

Application of the implementability framework  Guidelines on topics representing a high burden of illness in primary (diabetes, hypertension) and institutional care (chronic ulcer, heart failure) were selected from among those evaluated by the Guidelines Advisory Committee (GAC, a program that systematically appraised and summarized guidelines.  A form was developed to extract content from each guideline according to the implementability framework Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center13

Application of the implementability framework  Extracted data was tabulated.  The presence of implementability elements within sampled guidelines was described using summary statistics including number, proportion, and mean or median.  Detailed content was analyzed using Mays’ narrative review method, based on verbatim reporting, rather than statistical summary or conceptual analysis of information. Data were examined to discuss the number of guidelines addressing each element overall and by topic Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center14

J Health Serv Res Policy.J Health Serv Res Policy Jul;10 Suppl 1:6-20. Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy- making in the health field. Mays NMays N, Pope C, Popay J.Pope CPopay J Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center15

Results  A total of 18 studies were reviewed from among 1,348 (441 MEDLINE, 907 EMBASE)  Eligible studies: one RCT, one observational study, four systematic reviews, three surveys, two modified Delphi studies, and six qualitative studies involving either focus groups or interviews.  Eight implementability domains: adaptability, usability, validity, applicability, communicability, accommodation, implementation, and evaluation Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center16

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center17

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center18

Cont. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center19

Cont. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center20 Based on the implementability framework, data were extracted from 20 guidelines on the management of diabetes (n = 8), hypertension (n = 4), leg ulcer (n = 3) and heart failure (n = 5) from eight different countries, including Australia (n = 2), Brussels (n = 1), Canada (n = 4), the Netherlands (n = 1), New Zealand (n = 1), Singapore (n = 1), the United Kingdom (n = 4), and United States (n = 6). Most were produced by professional associations or government agencies (75%).

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center21

Cont.  One-half of the guidelines were published in journals or available in a summary version, and one-quarter were available as downloadable digital or patient versions.  Many were very large documents with median pages of 72.5 (range 21.0 to 878.0),  Median number of references of (15.0 to 3,487.0),  Median number of recommendations of 41.5 (8.0 to 214.0).  Most featured a table of contents (75.0%),  55% included a recommendation summary, 65% algorithm  90% Clinical considerations to individualize recommendation Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center22

Cont.  75.0% consisted of tables that summarized diagnostic or risk criteria, pharmacologic dosing, indications for treatment or referral, and management options.  50 % included information to educate or engage patients. Of these, five provided information to help clinicians discuss relevant issues with patients, two included information sheets for patients, and seven provided contact information (phone number or web site) where information for patients could be obtained. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center23

Cont.  No guidelines identified stakeholder needs or values, or costs or impact associated with use.  Few included technical (45.0%), regulatory (15.0%), human resources (5.0%), or professional competency (20.0%) information required to accommodate guideline use.  50 % included performance measures that could be used to monitor recommended clinical care. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center24

Cont.  While 45.0% mentioned the need to actively promote guideline use, none thoroughly described how to undertake or evaluate this process  30% included templates such as order forms or assessment checklists  15 % offered instructions for identifying barriers of use  20 % tailoring the guidelines to suit local circumstances Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center25

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center26

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center27

Discussion  Our findings simply suggest that more guidelines could be modified to include implementability content, but it remains unclear how various implementability features might influence guideline use.  Evidence is just one of several factors that inform decisions about guideline use. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center28

Cont.  We studied guidelines relevant to primary and institutional care.  Other guidelines relevant to specialty care may differ in their implementability characteristics.  However, while we reviewed few guidelines, they were specifically selected to represent different topics, countries, and types of developer.  Each element may not have been relevant to all guidelines reviewed, but this exercise serves as an exploratory, baseline effort to develop the framework according to content available in a range of guidelines. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center29

Conclusions  New governance structures may be required to accommodate development of guidelines with these features.  Further research is needed to validate the proposed framework of guideline implementability, develop methods for preparing this information, and evaluate how inclusion of this information influences guideline use. Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center30

Copyright: Knowledge Utilization Research Center31 Thank You! You could find more details on hidden slides