Addressing implementation challenges during guideline development – a case study of Swedish national guidelines for methods of preventing disease

BMC Health Services Research

Monica E Nyström¹  Rickard Garvare²  Lars Weinehall³  Therese Kardakis¹  Linda Richter-Sundberg¹ 

[1] Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Medical Management Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, SE 17177, Sweden;Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, SE 971 87, Sweden;Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, Umeå, SE 90185, Sweden

关键词: Lifestyle change;    Disease prevention;    Implementation;    Evidence-based public health;    Development process;    Clinical practice guidelines;   

Others  :  1089814
DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-014-0672-4

 received in 2014-02-27, accepted in 2014-12-17,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Many of the world’s life threatening diseases (e.g. cancer, heart disease, stroke) could be prevented by eliminating life-style habits such as tobacco use, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and excessive alcohol use. Incorporating evidence-based research on methods to change unhealthy lifestyle habits in clinical practice would be equally valuable. However gaps between guideline development and implementation are well documented, with implications for health care quality, safety and effectiveness. The development phase of guidelines has been shown to be important both for the quality in guideline content and for the success of implementation. There are, however, indications that guidelines related to general disease prevention methods encounter specific barriers compared to guidelines that are diagnosis-specific. In 2011 the Swedish National board for Health and Welfare launched guidelines with a preventive scope. The aim of this study was to investigate how implementation challenges were addressed during the development process of these disease preventive guidelines.

Methods

Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the guideline development management group. Archival data detailing the guideline development process were also collected and used in the analysis. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis as the analytical framework.

Results

The study identified several strategies and approaches that were used to address implementation challenges during guideline development. Four themes emerged from the analysis: broad agreements and consensus about scope and purpose; a formalized and structured development procedure; systematic and active involvement of stakeholders; and openness and transparency in the specific guideline development procedure. Additional factors concerning the scope of prevention and the work environment of guideline developers were perceived to influence the possibilities to address implementation issues.

Conclusions

This case study provides examples of how guideline developers perceive and approach the issue of implementation during the development and early launch of prevention guidelines. Models for guideline development could benefit from an initial assessment of how the guideline topic, its target context and stakeholders will affect the upcoming implementation.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Richter-Sundberg et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]World Health Organization. 2008-2013 action plan for the global strategy for the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases: prevent and control cardiovascular diseases, cancers, chronic respiratory diseases and diabetes. www.who.int/nmh/publications/9789241597418/en/ (2008). Accessed 12 Sept 2014
• [2]Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, et al.: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004, 8:6.
• [3]Gagliardi AM, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM: How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implement Sci 2011, 6:26. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein E, Marcus AC: Why don’t we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the Efficacy-to-Effectiveness Transition. Am J Public Health 2003, 93:1261-1267.
• [5]IOM Institute of Medicine: Guidelines we can trust. The National Academies Press, Washington; 2011.
• [6]Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Muir Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS: Evidence based medicin: What it is and what it is’nt. BMJ 1996, 312:71-72.
• [7]Turner T, Misso M, Harris C, Green S: Development of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs): comparing approaches. Implement Sci 2008, 3:45. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Fischer AJ, Threlfall A, Meah S, Cookson H, Rutter H, Kelly MP: The appraisal of public health interventions: an overview. J Public Health 2013, 35:488-494.
• [9]Eccles MP, Grimshaw JM, Shekelle P, Schünemann HJ, Woolf S: Developing clinical practice guidelines: target audiences, identifying topics for guidelines, guideline group composition and functioning and conflicts of interest. Implement Sci 2012, 7:60. BioMed Central Full Text
• [10]Knai C, Brusamento S, Legido-Quigley H, Saliba V, Panteli D, Turk E, Car J, McKee M, Busse R: Systematic review of the methodological quality of clinical guideline development for the management of chronic disease in Europe. Health Policy 2012, 107:157-167.
• [11]Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M, Davis D: Improving Patient Care: The Implementation of Change in Health Care. 2nd edition. Wiley, Chicester; 2013.
• [12]Shekelle PG, Woolf SH, Eccles M, Grimshaw J: Clinical guidelines: developing guidelines. BMJ 1999, 318:593-596.
• [13]Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Solà I, Gich I, Delgado-Noguera M, Rigau D, Tort S, Bonfill X, Burgers J, Schunemann H: The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care 2010, 19:e58.
• [14]Sachs M: Successful strategies and methods of nursing standards implementation. Pflege 2006, 19:33-44.
• [15]Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement. Health Res Policy Syst 2006, 4:22. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Oxman AD, Schuneman HJ, Fretheim A: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 2 Priority setting. Health Res Policy Syst 2006, 4:14. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Van der Wees PJ, Hendriks EJM, Custers JWH, Burgers JS, Dekker J, de Bie RA: Comparison of international guideline programs to evaluate and update the Dutch program for clinical guideline development in physical therapy. BMC Health Serv Res 2007, 7:191. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Kerwin AJ, Haut ER, Burns JB, Como JJ, Haider A, Stassen N, Dahm P: Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Practice Management Guidelines Ad Hoc Committee: The Eastern Association of the Surgery of Trauma approach to practice management guideline development using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012, 73(4):283-287.
• [19]Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008, 336:924-926.
• [20]AGREE The Collaboration: Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice. guidelines: the AGREE project Qual Saf Health Care 2003, 12:18-23.
• [21]Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P: Guidelines International Network: toward International Standards for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Intern Med 2012, 156(7):525-531.
• [22]Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, Fervers B, Graham ID, Grimshaw J, Hanna SE, Littlejohns P, Makarski J, Zitzelsberger L: AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ 2010, 182(18):E839-E842.
• [23]Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, Fervers B, Graham ID, Hanna SE, Makarski J: Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement. CMAJ 2010, 13(182):1045-1052.
• [24]Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abbound P-A, Rubin HR: Why Don’t Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines? A Framework for Improvement. JAMA 1999, 282:1458-1465.
• [25]Seddon ME, Marshall MN, Campbell SM, Roland MO: Systematic review of studies of quality of clinical care in general practice in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Qual Health Care 2001, 10:152-158.
• [26]Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJE, Mistiaen P: Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2008, 8:38. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Rashidian A, Eccles MP, Russell I: Falling on stony ground? A qualitative study of implementation of clinical guidelines prescribing recommendations in primary care. Health Policy 2008, 85:148-161.
• [28]Grilli R, Lomas J: Evaluating the message: the relationship between compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline. Med Care 1994, 32:202-213.
• [29]Rogers EM: Lessons for guidelines from the diffusion of innovations. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 1995, 21:324-328.
• [30]Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82:581-629.
• [31]Brusamento S, Legido-Quigley H, Panteli D, Turk E, Knai C, Saliba V, Car J, McKee M, Busse R: Assessing the effectiveness of strategies to implement clincial guidelines for the management of chronic diseases at primary care level in EU Members States: A systematic review. Health Policy 2012, 107:168-183.
• [32]Fie S, Norman IJ, While AE: The relationship between physicians’ and nurses’ personal physical activity habits and their health-promotion practice: a systematic review. Health Educ J 2013, 72:102-109.
• [33]Grol R, Wensing M: What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. MJA 2004, 180(Suppl 6):57-60.
• [34]Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination: The periodic health examination Can Med Assoc J 1979, 121:1193-1254.
• [35]Woolf SH, Atkins D: The evolving role of prevention in health care contributions of the U.S. preventive services task force. Am J Prev Med 2001, 20:13-20.
• [36]Kelly MP, Stewart E, Morgan A, Killoran A, Fischer A, Threlfall A, Bonnefoy J: A conceptual framework for public health: NICE’s emerging approach. Public Health 2009, 123:e14-e20.
• [37]Politi MC, Wolin KY, Légaré F: Implementing Clinical Practice Guidelines About Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Through Shared Decision Making. J Gen Intern Med 2013, 28:838-844.
• [38]Brobeck E, Odencrants S, Bergh H, Hildingh C: Health promotion practice and its implementation in Swedish health care. Int Nurs Rev 2013, 60:374-380.
• [39]Geense WW, van de Glind IM, LS Visscher T, van Achterberg T: Barriers, facilitators and attitudes influencing health promotion activities in general practice: an explorative pilot study. BMC Fam Pract 2013, 14:20. BioMed Central Full Text
• [40]Kelly M, Morgan A, Ellis S, Younger T, Huntley J, Swann C: Evidence based public health: A review of the experience of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of developing public health guidance in England. Soc Sci Med 2010, 71:1056-1062.
• [41]Swann C, Naidoo B, Kelly MP: A nudge in the right direction: developing guidance on changing behaviour. In Evidence based public health: Effectiveness and efficiency. 2nd edition. Edited by Shemilt I. Oxford University Press, Oxford; 2009:353-367.
• [42]The National board of health and welfare – how we draw up the guidelines [http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/nationalguidelines]
• [43]The National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Public health guidelines [https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-guidance/nice-guidelines/nicepublic-health-guidelines]
• [44]World Health Organization (WHO) Handbook for Guideline Development. [http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/75146/1/9789241548441_eng.pdf
• [45]The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) SIGN 50: a guideline developer’s handbook. [http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign50.pdf]
• [46]National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2012 Process and methods guides. The guidelines manual. [http://publications.nice.org.uk/pmg6]
• [47]Broqvist M, Branting-Elgstrand M, Carlsson P, Eklund K, Jakobsson A: National model for open priorities in healthcare (Nationell modell för öppna prioriteringar inom hälso- och sjukvård) [in Swedish] 2011, 14. [http://www.imh.liu.se/halso-och-sjukvardsanalys/prioriteringscentrum?l=en&sc=true]
• [48]Graneheim UH, Lundman B: Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004, 24:105-112.
• [49]Swedish Government bill 2002/03:35 [http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/10/09/78/2ee01484.pdf]
• [50]Grol R: Has guideline development gone astray? Yes. BMJ 2010, 340:06.
• [51]Grol R: Improving the Quality of Medical Care. J Am Med Assoc 2001, 286(20):2578-2585.
• [52]Ollenschläger G, Marshall C, Qureshi S, Rosenbrand K, Burgers J, Mäkelä M, Slutsky J: Improving the quality of health care: using international collaboration to inform guideline programmes by founding the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). Qual Saf Health Care 2004, 13:455-460.
• [53]Boivin A, Currie K, Fervers B, Gracia J, James M, Marshall C, Sakala C, Sanger C, Strid J, Thomas V, van der Weijden T, Grol R, Burgers J: Patient and public involvement in clinical guidelines: international experiences and future perspectives. Qual Saf Health Care 2010, 19:1-4.