Antiemetic Guidelines: Using Education to Improve Adherence and Reduce Incidence of CINV in Patients Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Translation of Evidence-Based Interventions Into Oncology Care Settings: An Integrative Review

BACKGROUND

Adoption of evidence remains slow, leading to variations in practices and quality of care. Examining evidence-based interventions implemented within oncology settings can guide knowledge translation efforts.

OBJECTIVE

This integrative review aimed to (1) identify topics implemented for oncology-related evidence-based practice (EBP) change; (2) describe frameworks, guidelines, and implementation strategies used to guide change; and (3) evaluate project quality.

METHODS

PubMed and CINAHL were searched to identify published practice change projects. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines were followed. Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted; content analysis was conducted. The Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set guided quality assessment.

RESULTS

Topics included infection control/prevention (n = 18), pain/palliative care (n = 13), psychosocial assessment (n = 11), and medication adherence (n = 8). Among the projects, Plan, Do, Study, Act (n = 8) and Lean Six Sigma (n = 6) frameworks were used most. Thirty-six projects identified guidelines that directed interventions. Multiple implementation strategies were reported in all articles with planning, education, and restructuring the most common. Reach, sustainability, and ability to be replicated were identified as quality gaps across projects.

CONCLUSION

The EBP topics that emerged are consistent with the oncology nursing priorities, including facilitating integration of EBP into practice. The studies identified used national guidelines and implementation strategies to move evidence into practice. Heterogeneity in measurement made synthesis of findings difficult across studies, although individual studies showed improvement in patient outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Development of an interprofessional oncology consortium could facilitate a standardized approach to implementation of high-priority topics that target improved patient outcomes, harmonize measures, and accelerate translation of evidence into practice.

Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review

Background

Guidelines aim to support evidence-informed practice but are inconsistently used without implementation strategies. Our prior scoping review revealed that guideline implementation interventions were not selected and tailored based on processes known to enhance guideline uptake and impact. The purpose of this study was to update the prior scoping review.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published from 2014 to January 2021 that evaluated guideline implementation interventions. We screened studies in triplicate and extracted data in duplicate. We reported study and intervention characteristics and studies that achieved impact with summary statistics.

Results

We included 118 studies that implemented guidelines on 16 clinical topics. With regard to implementation planning, 21% of studies referred to theories or frameworks, 50% pre-identified implementation barriers, and 36% engaged stakeholders in selecting or tailoring interventions. Studies that employed frameworks (n=25) most often used the theoretical domains framework (28%) or social cognitive theory (28%). Those that pre-identified barriers (n=59) most often consulted literature (60%). Those that engaged stakeholders (n=42) most often consulted healthcare professionals (79%). Common interventions included educating professionals about guidelines (44%) and information systems/technology (41%). Most studies employed multi-faceted interventions (75%). A total of 97 (82%) studies achieved impact (improvements in one or more reported outcomes) including 10 (40% of 25) studies that employed frameworks, 28 (47.45% of 59) studies that pre-identified barriers, 22 (52.38% of 42) studies that engaged stakeholders, and 21 (70% of 30) studies that employed single interventions.

Conclusions

Compared to our prior review, this review found that more studies used processes to select and tailor interventions, and a wider array of types of interventions across the Mazza taxonomy. Given that most studies achieved impact, this might reinforce the need for implementation planning. However, even studies that did not plan implementation achieved impact. Similarly, even single interventions achieved impact. Thus, a future systematic review based on this data is warranted to establish if the use of frameworks, barrier identification, stakeholder engagement, and multi-faceted interventions are associated with impact.

Trial registration

The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/4nxpr) and published in JBI Evidence Synthesis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01223-6.

Nomogram for Predicting Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting for Breast Cancer Patients

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common side effect of cancer treatment. The factors influencing CINV in breast cancer patients remain unclear. In this study, we developed a nomogram for predicting the occurrence of CINV in this group using prospective clinical data. We pooled data from multiple studies which focused on the emetogenic chemotherapy. Then, we collected 334 breast cancer patients at Hunan Cancer Hospital (training set) to analyze the demographic and clinical variables. Using multivariate logistic regression, we identified the five significant factors that were associated with CINV: history of CINV, chemotherapy regimen, chemotherapy cycle, metastasis, and symptoms of distress. Then, we construct a prediction nomogram. The external validation set comprised an additional 66 patients. The reliability of the nomogram was assessed by bootstrap resampling. The C-index was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.85) for the training set and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.62-0.85) for the validation set. Calibration curves showed good concordance between predicted and actual occurrence of CINV. In conclusions, our nomogram model can reliably predict the occurrence of CINV in breast cancer patients based on five significant variables, which might be useful in clinical decision-making.