Cargando…

The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review

IMPORTANCE: Guideline recommendations do not necessarily translate into changes in clinical practice behaviour or better patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to identify recent clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology and to determine their effect primarily on pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bora, Ana-Mihaela, Piechotta, Vanessa, Kreuzberger, Nina, Monsef, Ina, Wender, Andreas, Follmann, Markus, Nothacker, Monika, Skoetz, Nicole
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10080872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37024867
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x
_version_ 1785021006416445440
author Bora, Ana-Mihaela
Piechotta, Vanessa
Kreuzberger, Nina
Monsef, Ina
Wender, Andreas
Follmann, Markus
Nothacker, Monika
Skoetz, Nicole
author_facet Bora, Ana-Mihaela
Piechotta, Vanessa
Kreuzberger, Nina
Monsef, Ina
Wender, Andreas
Follmann, Markus
Nothacker, Monika
Skoetz, Nicole
author_sort Bora, Ana-Mihaela
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: Guideline recommendations do not necessarily translate into changes in clinical practice behaviour or better patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to identify recent clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology and to determine their effect primarily on patient-relevant outcomes and secondarily on healthcare professionals' adherence. METHODS: A systematic search of five electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, GIN, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was conducted on 16 december 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) assessing the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies on patient-relevant outcomes (overall survival, quality of life, adverse events) and healthcare professionals' adherence outcomes (screening, referral, prescribing, attitudes, knowledge) in the oncological setting were targeted. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the ROBINS-I tool were used for assessing the risk of bias. Certainty in the evidence was evaluated according to GRADE recommendations. This review was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the identification number CRD42021268593. FINDINGS: Of 1326 records identified, nine studies, five cluster RCTs and four controlled before-and after studies, were included in the narrative synthesis. All nine studies assess the effect of multi-component interventions in 3577 cancer patients and more than 450 oncologists, nurses and medical staff. PATIENT-LEVEL: Educational meetings combined with materials, opinion leaders, audit and feedback, a tailored intervention or academic detailing may have little to no effect on overall survival, quality of life and adverse events of cancer patients compared to no intervention, however, the evidence is either uncertain or very uncertain. PROVIDER-LEVEL: Multi-component interventions may increase or slightly increase guideline adherence regarding screening, referral and prescribing behaviour of healthcare professionals according to guidelines, but the certainty in evidence is low. The interventions may have little to no effect on attitudes and knowledge of healthcare professionals, still, the evidence is very uncertain. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Knowledge and skill accumulation through team-oriented or online educational training and dissemination of materials embedded in multi-component interventions seem to be the most frequently researched guideline implementation strategies in oncology recently. This systematic review provides an overview of recent guideline implementation strategies in oncology, encourages future implementation research in this area and informs policymakers and professional organisations on the development and adoption of implementation strategies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10080872
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100808722023-04-08 The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review Bora, Ana-Mihaela Piechotta, Vanessa Kreuzberger, Nina Monsef, Ina Wender, Andreas Follmann, Markus Nothacker, Monika Skoetz, Nicole BMC Health Serv Res Research Article IMPORTANCE: Guideline recommendations do not necessarily translate into changes in clinical practice behaviour or better patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to identify recent clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology and to determine their effect primarily on patient-relevant outcomes and secondarily on healthcare professionals' adherence. METHODS: A systematic search of five electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, GIN, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was conducted on 16 december 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) assessing the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies on patient-relevant outcomes (overall survival, quality of life, adverse events) and healthcare professionals' adherence outcomes (screening, referral, prescribing, attitudes, knowledge) in the oncological setting were targeted. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the ROBINS-I tool were used for assessing the risk of bias. Certainty in the evidence was evaluated according to GRADE recommendations. This review was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the identification number CRD42021268593. FINDINGS: Of 1326 records identified, nine studies, five cluster RCTs and four controlled before-and after studies, were included in the narrative synthesis. All nine studies assess the effect of multi-component interventions in 3577 cancer patients and more than 450 oncologists, nurses and medical staff. PATIENT-LEVEL: Educational meetings combined with materials, opinion leaders, audit and feedback, a tailored intervention or academic detailing may have little to no effect on overall survival, quality of life and adverse events of cancer patients compared to no intervention, however, the evidence is either uncertain or very uncertain. PROVIDER-LEVEL: Multi-component interventions may increase or slightly increase guideline adherence regarding screening, referral and prescribing behaviour of healthcare professionals according to guidelines, but the certainty in evidence is low. The interventions may have little to no effect on attitudes and knowledge of healthcare professionals, still, the evidence is very uncertain. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Knowledge and skill accumulation through team-oriented or online educational training and dissemination of materials embedded in multi-component interventions seem to be the most frequently researched guideline implementation strategies in oncology recently. This systematic review provides an overview of recent guideline implementation strategies in oncology, encourages future implementation research in this area and informs policymakers and professional organisations on the development and adoption of implementation strategies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x. BioMed Central 2023-04-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10080872/ /pubmed/37024867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bora, Ana-Mihaela
Piechotta, Vanessa
Kreuzberger, Nina
Monsef, Ina
Wender, Andreas
Follmann, Markus
Nothacker, Monika
Skoetz, Nicole
The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
title The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
title_full The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
title_fullStr The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
title_short The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
title_sort effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology—a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10080872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37024867
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x
work_keys_str_mv AT boraanamihaela theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT piechottavanessa theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT kreuzbergernina theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT monsefina theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT wenderandreas theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT follmannmarkus theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT nothackermonika theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT skoetznicole theeffectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT boraanamihaela effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT piechottavanessa effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT kreuzbergernina effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT monsefina effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT wenderandreas effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT follmannmarkus effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT nothackermonika effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview
AT skoetznicole effectivenessofclinicalguidelineimplementationstrategiesinoncologyasystematicreview