Opening the black box: a study of the process of NICE guidelines implementation

'Building on shaky ground'-challenges to and solutions for primary care guideline implementation in four provinces in South Africa: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Clinical guidelines support evidence-informed quality patient care. Our study explored perspectives of South African subnational health managers regarding barriers to and enablers for implementation for all available primary care guidelines.

DESIGN

We used qualitative research methods, including semistructured, individual interviews and an interpretative perspective. Thematic content analysis was used to develop data categories and themes.

SETTING

We conducted research in four of nine South African provinces with diverse geographic, economic and health system arrangements (Eastern Cape, Western Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo). South Africa is a middle-income country with high levels of inequality. The settings represented public sector rural and peri-urban health facilities.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-two participants with provincial and district health management roles, that comprised implementation and/or training on primary care guidelines, were included.

RESULTS

Participants recommended urgent consideration of health system challenges, particularly financial constraints, impacting on access to the guidelines themselves and to medical equipment and supplies necessary to adhere to guidelines. They suggested that overcoming service delivery gaps requires strengthening of leadership, clarification of roles and enhanced accountability. Participants suggested that inadequate numbers of skilled clinical staff hampered guideline use and, ultimately, patient care. Quality assurance of training programmes for clinicians-particularly nurses-interdisciplinary training, and strengthening post-training mentorship were recommended. Furthermore, fit-for-purpose guideline implementation necessitates considering the unique settings of facilities, including local culture and geography. This requires guideline development to include guideline end users.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines are one of the policy tools to achieve evidence-informed, cost-effective and universal healthcare. But, if not effectively implemented, they have no impact. Subnational health managers in poorly resourced settings suggested that shortcomings in the health system, along with poor consultation with end users, affect implementation. Short-term improvements are possible through increasing access to and training on guidelines. However, health system strengthening and recognition of socio-cultural-geographic diversity are prerequisites for context-appropriate evidence-informed practice.

Clinician perspectives on the use of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for the process of transition in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

BACKGROUND

The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines recommends the following steps in the transition from child to adult services for young people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): reassessment before and after transition, transition planning, formal meeting between services, and involvement from young person and carer, completed by age 18.

METHODS

A UK surveillance study asked clinicians to report young people on their caseloads with ADHD in need of transition to adult services in 2016 to support their continued access to medication need. Clinicians reported young people as they aged to within 6 months of the transition boundary, a prospective questionnaire prior to transition asked about intended transition and the use of local transition protocols. A retrospective questionnaire sent 9 months later established which steps recommended by NICE were followed during transition. Clinicians (38) working in child or adult services were interviewed about their experiences of transition and the use of NICE guidelines during transition and were analysed using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Information was shared between services in 85% of the 315 identified transition cases. A joint meeting was planned in 16% of cases; joint working before transfer occurred in 10% of cases. Clinicians were aware of NICE guidelines; they had mixed views on whether (local) guidelines or protocols were helpful. The main reason for not following guidelines was workload and resources: "NICE recommends stuff that is miles above what we will ever be able to provide".

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians involved in the transition process of young people with ADHD judged NICE guidelines to be unrealistic given the current limited resources and service organization. More open dialogue is needed for recommendations on service models to bridge the gap between guideline recommendations and what is viewed as feasible and how implementation of guidance is funded, monitored, and prioritized. This may lead to valuable changes in the consultation process, for example, consideration of a layered (gold, standard, and minimal) system for some NICE guidelines.

Pragmatic trials and implementation science: grounds for divorce?

Background

The paper opens with a brief history of two of the major intellectual components of the recent utilitarian turn in clinical research, namely ‘pragmatic trials’ and ‘implementation science’. The two schools of thought developed independently and the paper scrutinises their mutual compatibilities and incompatibilities, asking: i) what do the leading advocates of pragmatic trials assume about the transfer of research findings to real-world practice and ii) what role pragmatic trials can and should play in the evaluation of implementation science strategies.

Methods

The paper utilises ‘explication de texte’: i) providing a close reading of the inferential logics contained in major published expositions of the two paradigms, and ii) interrogating the conclusions of a pragmatic trial of an intervention providing guidelines on retinal screening aimed at family practitioners.

Results

The paper is in two parts. Part 1 unearths some significant incommensurability – the pragmatic trial literature retains an antiquated view of knowledge transfer and is overly optimistic about the wide applicability the findings of pragmatic trials to ‘real world’ conditions. Part 2 of the paper outlines an empirical strategy to better penetrate the mechanisms of knowledge transfer and to tackle the issue of the generalisabilty of research findings in implementation science.

Conclusions

Pragmatism, classically, is about problem solving and the melding of perspectives. The core research requirement in implementation science is a fundamental shift from the narrow shoulders of pragmatic trials to a model of explanation building based upon a multi-case, multi-method body of evidence.

CE: Original Research: Exploring Clinicians' Perceptions About Sustaining an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Program

: Purpose: This study aimed to address the knowledge gap between implementing and sustaining evidence-based fall prevention practices for hospitalized patients by exploring perspectives of the interprofessional health care team.

DESIGN

A qualitative design was used to capture insights from clinicians across disciplines in a large midwestern academic medical center.

METHODS

Four homogenous semistructured focus groups and three individual interviews involving a total of 20 clinicians were conducted between October 2013 and March 2014. Audio-recorded data were transcribed and analyzed using inductive qualitative analysis.

FINDINGS

Two primary themes emerged from participants regarding the sustainability of an evidence-based fall prevention program: communication patterns within the interprofessional health care team and influences of hospital organizational practices and elements. Several subthemes also emerged. Participants gave nursing staff primary responsibility for fall risk assessment and prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual professional perceptions and practices, as well as organizational characteristics, affect the sustainability of evidence-based fall prevention practices. While all team members recognized patient falls as a significant quality and safety issue, most believed that direct care nurses hold primary responsibility for leading fall prevention efforts. The data support the importance of effective interprofessional team communication and organizational practices in sustaining an evidence-based fall prevention program across inpatient units. Furthermore, the data call into question the wisdom in labeling quality indicators as "nursing sensitive"; the evidence indicates that a team approach is best.

A process evaluation of how the routine vaccination programme is implemented at GP practices in England

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the incidence of several pathogens of public health importance (measles, mumps, pertussis and rubella) has increased in Europe, leading to outbreaks. This has included England, where GP practices implement the vaccination programme based on government guidance. However, there has been no study of how implementation takes place, which makes it difficult to identify organisational variation and thus limits the ability to recommend interventions to improve coverage. The aim of this study is to undertake a comparative process evaluation of the implementation of the routine vaccination programme at GP practices in England.

METHODS

We recruited a sample of geographically and demographically diverse GP practices through a national research network and collected quantitative and qualitative data as part of a Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing analysis between May 2017 and February 2018. We conducted semi-structured interviews with practice staff involved in vaccination, who then completed an activity log for 2 weeks. Interviews were transcribed and coded using a framework method.

RESULTS

Nine practices completed data collection from diverse geographic and socio-economic contexts, and 52 clinical and non-clinical staff participated in 26 interviews. Information relating to 372 vaccination appointments (233 childhood and 139 adult appointments) was captured using activity logs. We have defined a 14-stage care delivery value chain and detailed process map for vaccination. Areas of greatest variation include the method of reminder and recall activities, structure of vaccination appointments and task allocation between staff groups. For childhood vaccination, mean appointment length was 15.9 min (range 9.0-22.0 min) and 10.9 min for adults (range 6.8-14.1 min). Non-clinical administrative activities comprised 59.7% total activity (range 48.4-67.0%). Appointment length and total time were not related to coverage, whereas capacity in terms of appointments per eligible patient may improve coverage. Administrative tasks had lower fidelity of implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is variation in how GP practices in England implement the delivery of the routine vaccination programme. Further work is required to evaluate capacity factors in a wider range of practices, alongside other contextual factors, including the working culture within practices.

Overtesting and undertesting in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Health systems are currently subject to unprecedented financial strains. Inappropriate test use wastes finite health resources (overuse) and delays diagnoses and treatment (underuse). As most patient care is provided in primary care, it represents an ideal setting to mitigate waste.

OBJECTIVE

To identify overuse and underuse of diagnostic tests in primary care.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We searched MEDLINE and Embase from January 1999 to October 2017 for studies that measured the inappropriateness of any diagnostic test (measured against a national or international guideline) ordered for adult patients in primary care.

RESULTS

We included 357 171 patients from 63 studies in 15 countries. We extracted 103 measures of inappropriateness (41 underuse and 62 overuse) from included studies for 47 different diagnostic tests.The overall rate of inappropriate diagnostic test ordering varied substantially (0.2%-100%)%).17 tests were underused >50% of the time. Of these, echocardiography (n=4 measures) was consistently underused (between 54% and 89%, n=4). There was large variation in the rate of inappropriate underuse of pulmonary function tests (38%-78%, n=8).Eleven tests were inappropriately overused >50% of the time. Echocardiography was consistently overused (77%-92%), whereas inappropriate overuse of urinary cultures, upper endoscopy and colonoscopy varied widely, from 36% to 77% (n=3), 10%-54% (n=10) and 8%-52% (n=2), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is marked variation in the appropriate use of diagnostic tests in primary care. Specifically, the use of echocardiography (both underuse and overuse) is consistently poor. There is substantial variation in the rate of inappropriate underuse of pulmonary function tests and the overuse of upper endoscopy, urinary cultures and colonoscopy.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016048832.

Evidence use in decision-making on introducing innovations: a systematic scoping review with stakeholder feedback

BACKGROUND

A range of evidence informs decision-making on innovation in health care, including formal research findings, local data and professional opinion. However, cultural and organisational factors often prevent the translation of evidence for innovations into practice. In addition to the characteristics of evidence, it is known that processes at the individual level influence its impact on decision-making. Less is known about the ways in which processes at the professional, organisational and local system level shape evidence use and its role in decisions to adopt innovations.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was used to review the health literature on innovations within acute and primary care and map processes at the professional, organisational and local system levels which influence how evidence informs decision-making on innovation. Stakeholder feedback on the themes identified was collected via focus groups to test and develop the findings.

RESULTS

Following database and manual searches, 31 studies reporting primary qualitative data met the inclusion criteria: 24 were of sufficient methodological quality to be included in the thematic analysis. Evidence use in decision-making on innovation is influenced by multi-level processes (professional, organisational, local system) and interactions across these levels. Preferences for evidence vary by professional group and health service setting. Organisations can shape professional behaviour by requiring particular forms of evidence to inform decision-making. Pan-regional organisations shape innovation decision-making at lower levels. Political processes at all levels shape the selection and use of evidence in decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

The synthesis of results from primary qualitative studies found that evidence use in decision-making on innovation is influenced by processes at multiple levels. Interactions between different levels shape evidence use in decision-making (e.g. professional groups and organisations can use local systems to validate evidence and legitimise innovations, while local systems can tailor or frame evidence to influence activity at lower levels). Organisational leaders need to consider whether the environment in which decisions are made values diverse evidence and stakeholder perspectives. Further qualitative research on decision-making practices that highlights how and why different types of evidence come to count during decisions, and tracks the political aspects of decisions about innovation, is needed.

Identification of factors that support successful implementation of care bundles in the acute medical setting: a qualitative study

Background

Clinical guidelines offer an accessible synthesis of the best evidence of effectiveness of interventions, providing recommendations and standards for clinical practice. Many guidelines are relevant to the diagnosis and management of the acutely unwell patient during the first 24–48 h of admission. Care bundles are comprised of a small number of evidence-based interventions that when implemented together aim to achieve better outcomes than when implemented individually. Care bundles that are explicitly developed from guidelines to provide a set of related evidence-based actions have been shown to improve the care of many conditions in emergency, acute and critical care settings. This study aimed to review the implementation of two distinct care bundles in the acute medical setting and identify the factors that supported successful implementation.

Methods

Two initiatives that had used a systematic approach to quality improvement to successfully implement care bundles within the acute medical setting were selected as case studies. Contemporaneous data generated during the initiatives included the review reports, review minutes and audio recordings of the review meetings at different time points. Data were subject to deductive analysis using three domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify factors that were important in the implementation of the care bundles.

Results

Several factors were identified that directly influenced the implementation of the care bundles. Firstly, the availability of resources to support initiatives, which included training to develop quality improvement skills within the team and building capacity within the organisation more generally. Secondly, the perceived sustainability of changes by stakeholders influenced the embedding new care processes into existing clinical systems, maximising their chance of being sustained. Thirdly, senior leadership support was seen as critical not just in supporting implementation but also in sustaining longer-term changes brought about by the initiative. Lastly, practitioner incentives were identified as potential levers to engage junior doctors, a crucial part of the acute medical work force and essential to the initiatives, as there is currently little recognition or reward for involvement

Conclusions

The factors identified have been shown to be supportive in the successful implementation of care bundles as a mechanism for implementing clinical guidelines. Addressing these factors at a practitioner and organisational level, alongside the use of a systematic quality improvement approach, should increase the likelihood that care bundles will be implemented successfully to deliver evidence based changes in the acute medical setting.

Leadership for Knowledge Translation: The Case of CLAHRCs

Calls for successful knowledge translation (KT) in health care have multiplied over recent years. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) program is a policy initiative in the United Kingdom aimed at speeding-up the translation of research into health care practice. Using multiple qualitative research methods and drawing on the ongoing processes used by individuals to interpret and contextualize information, we explore how new organizational forms for KT bridge the gap between research and practice. We pay particular attention to the relationship between the organization and practices of KT and leadership. Our empirical data demonstrate how the relationship between leadership and KT shifted over time from a push model where the authoritarian top-down leadership team set outcome measures by which to judge KT performance to one which aimed to distribute leadership capacity across a wide range of stakeholders in health and social care systems. The relationship between the organization and practices of KT and leadership is affected by local contextual influences on policies directed at increasing the uptake of research in clinical practice. Policy makers and service leaders need to recognize that more dispersed type of leadership is needed to accommodate the idiosyncratic nature of collective action.

Can general practitioners do the follow-ups after surgery with ventilation tubes in the tympanic membrane? Two years audiological data

Background

A university hospital in Mid-Norway has modified their guidelines for follow-up after insertion of ventilation tubes (VTs) in the tympanic membrane, transferring the controls of the healthiest children to general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of these guidelines by exploring audiological outcome and subjective hearing complaints two years after surgery, assessing if follow-ups in general practice resulted in poorer outcome.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed at the university hospital and in general practice in Mid-Norway. Children below 18 years who underwent surgery with VTs between Nov 1st 2007 and Dec 31st 2008 (n = 136) were invited to participate. Pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry and tympanometry were measured. A self-report questionnaire assessed subjective hearing, ear complaints and the location of follow-ups. This study includes enough patients to observe group differences in mean threshold (0.5–1–2–4 kHz) of 9 dB or more.

Results

There were no preoperative differences in audiometry or tympanometry between the children scheduled for follow-ups by GPs (n = 23) or otolaryngologists (n = 50). Two years after surgery there were no differences between the GP and otolaryngologist groups in improvement of mean hearing thresholds (12.8 vs 12.6 dB, p = 0.9) or reduction of middle ears with effusion (78.0 vs 75.0%, p = 0.9). We found no differences between the groups in terms of parental reports of child hearing or ear complaints.

Conclusions

Implementation of new clinical guidelines for follow-ups after insertion of VTs did not negatively affect audiological outcomes or subjective hearing complaints two years after surgery.

Implementing guidelines for follow-up after surgery with ventilation tube in the tympanic membrane in Norway: a retrospective study

Background

When clinical guidelines are being changed a strategy is required for implementation. St. Olavs University Hospital in Norway modified their guidelines for the follow-up care of children after insertion of ventilation tubes (VT) in the tympanic membrane, transferring the controls of the healthiest children to General Practitioners (GPs). This study evaluates the implementation process in the hospital and in general practice by exploring two issues: 1) Whether the hospital discharged the patients they were supposed to and 2) whether the children consulted a GP for follow-up care.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed at St. Olavs University Hospital, Norway and general practice in Mid-Norway. Children under the age of 18 who underwent insertion of VT between Nov 1st 2007 and Dec 31st 2008 (n = 136) were included. Degree of guideline adherence at the hospital and in general practice was measured.

Results

The hospital adhered to the guidelines in two-thirds (68.5%) of the patients, planning more patients for follow-up by their GP than recommended in the guidelines (25.8% vs. 12.4%). All except one contacted their GP for control. In total 60% were referred back to specialist health services within two years.

Conclusions

The methods for guideline implementation were successful in securing consultations for follow-up care in general practice. Lack of guideline adherence in the hospital can partly be explained by the lack of quality of the guideline. Further studies are needed to evaluate the quality of controls done by the GPs in order to consider implications for follow-up after VT surgery.