ACC/AHA Special Report: Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation Strategies: A Summary of Systematic Reviews by the NHLBI Implementation Science Work Group

Author:

Chan Wiley V.1,Pearson Thomas A.1,Bennett Glen C.1,Cushman William C.1,Gaziano Thomas A.1,Gorman Paul N.1,Handler Joel1,Krumholz Harlan M.1,Kushner Robert F.1,MacKenzie Thomas D.1,Sacco Ralph L.1,Smith Sidney C.1,Stevens Victor J.1,Wells Barbara L.1,Castillo Graciela,Heil Susan K.R.,Stephens Jennifer,Vann Julie C. Jacobson

Affiliation:

1. Implementation Science Work Group, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Center for Translation Research and Implementation Science; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Memphis, TN. Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. American Institutes for Research conducted the systematic review under a contract with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Abstract

Background: In 2008, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an Implementation Science Work Group to assess evidence-based strategies for effectively implementing clinical practice guidelines. This was part of a larger effort to update existing clinical practice guidelines on cholesterol, blood pressure, and overweight/obesity. Objectives: Review evidence from the published implementation science literature and identify effective or promising strategies to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical practice guidelines. Methods: This systematic review was conducted on 4 critical questions, each focusing on the adoption and effectiveness of 4 intervention strategies: (1) reminders, (2) educational outreach visits, (3) audit and feedback, and (4) provider incentives. A scoping review of the Rx for Change database of systematic reviews was used to identify promising guideline implementation interventions aimed at providers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori for each question, and the published literature was initially searched up to 2012, and then updated with a supplemental search to 2015. Two independent reviewers screened the returned citations to identify relevant reviews and rated the quality of each included review. Results: Audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care (15 of 21 reviews and 12 of 13 reviews, respectively) and clinical outcomes (7 of 12 reviews and 3 of 5 reviews, respectively). Provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness for improving both process of care (3 of 4 reviews) and clinical outcomes (3 reviews equally distributed between generally effective, mixed, and generally ineffective). Reminders showed mixed effectiveness for improving process of care outcomes (27 reviews with 11 mixed and 3 generally ineffective results) and were generally ineffective for clinical outcomes (18 reviews with 6 mixed and 9 generally ineffective results). Educational outreach visits (2 of 2 reviews), reminders (3 of 4 reviews), and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were generally effective for cost reduction. Educational outreach visits (1 of 1 review) and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were also generally effective for cost-effectiveness outcomes. Barriers to clinician adoption or adherence to guidelines included time constraints (8 reviews/overviews); limited staffing resources (2 overviews); timing (5 reviews/overviews); clinician skepticism (5 reviews/overviews); clinician knowledge of guidelines (4 reviews/overviews); and higher age of the clinician (1 overview). Facilitating factors included guideline characteristics such as format, resources, and end-user involvement (6 reviews/overviews); involving stakeholders (5 reviews/overviews); leadership support (5 reviews/overviews); scope of implementation (5 reviews/overviews); organizational culture such as multidisciplinary teams and low-baseline adherence (9 reviews/overviews); and electronic guidelines systems (3 reviews). Conclusion: The strategies of audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care and clinical outcomes. Reminders and provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness, or were generally ineffective. No general conclusion could be reached about cost effectiveness, because of limitations in the evidence. Important gaps exist in the evidence on effectiveness of implementation interventions, especially regarding clinical outcomes, cost effectiveness and contextual issues affecting successful implementation.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Reference56 articles.

1. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. NHLBI Cardiovascular Disease Thought Leaders Meeting Report: Research Translation Dissemination and Application - Moving Toward a New Vision and Strategic Framework. 2005. Available at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-pro/resources/heart/cardiovascular-disease-thought-leaders-meeting-report. Accessed January 1 2012.

2. Why Don't Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines?

3. Refocusing the Agenda on Cardiovascular Guidelines

4. Influencing personal and environmental conditions for community health: A multilevel intervention model

5. Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). EPOC Taxonomy. Available at: https://epoc.cochrane.org/epoc-taxonomy. Accessed March 23 2012.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3