Demands on Health Information and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients from the Perspective of Adults with Mental Illness and Family Members: A Qualitative Study with In-Depth Interviews

Mapping the awareness and knowledge about patient and public versions of guidelines among stakeholders in China: a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Patient and public versions of guidelines (PVGs) have gradually gained wide recognition and attention from the public and the society due to their scientific, professional, and authoritative characteristics. This study aims to survey the awareness and knowledge of PVGs among stakeholders in China.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

This was a cross-sectional survey among stakeholders (guideline developers, clinicians, journal editors, patients, and the public) in China. We self-designed the questionnaire and distributed it through the Questionnaire Star platform. The primary outcomes were awareness of PVGs and opinions about the development methodology, writing, dissemination, and implementation of PVGs. The Kruskal-Wallis H test and post hoc multiple comparison tests were used to compare the levels of awareness of PVGs between different subgroups of respondents.

RESULTS

A total of 1319 valid questionnaires were collected: 722 from guideline developers, 136 from clinicians, 83 from journal editors, 284 from patients, and 94 from members of the public. Of all respondents, 253 (19.2%) had not heard of PVGs, 349 (26.5%) had heard of PVGs but had no further knowledge, 475 (36.0%) had some knowledge of PVGs, and 242 (18.3%) were familiar with or had participated in the development of PVGs. Guideline developers, clinicians, and journal editors had higher awareness than patients and the public. Higher education and older age also correlated with higher awareness of PVGs. More than half (52.9%) of guideline developers considered that both rewriting of the source guidelines and direct development as independent documents were appropriate methods for developing PVGs. The survey respondents agreed that clinicians (97.3%), guideline methodologists (76.6%), representatives of patients and the public (74.5%), and medical editors or writers (63.4%) should participate in the development of PVGs. More than 80% of the respondents agreed that the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations should be presented; however, there was no consensus in the form of presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

The level of awareness of PVGs among stakeholders in China is relatively low and differs between different stakeholder groups, but the majority of key stakeholders have a positive attitude toward PVGs. The collection of the perspectives and opinions on the development methods, writing, dissemination, and implementation provides a key reference and basis for the future optimization and improvement of PVGs development.

Experiencing (Shared) Decision Making: Results from a Qualitative Study of People with Mental Illness and Their Family Members

(1) Background: There is a fundamental shift in healthcare toward shared decision making (SDM). This study explores SDM from the perspective of individuals affected by mental illness and their family members and investigates factors which promote and hinder the process. (2) Methods: We conducted N = 15 telephone interviews (n = 4 adults affected by mental illness, n = 5 family members, n = 6 both applicable, the majority reporting experiences with affective and anxiety disorders). Data were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed according to procedures established by Mayring. (3) Results: Individuals affected by mental illness and their family members have a strong desire to be involved in treatment decisions and to participate in finding a diagnosis. Often these stakeholders are denied the opportunity to participate; sometimes enabling behaviors impede participation. The stigmatization of mental illnesses is a major barrier. There are also structural barriers to SDM within the healthcare system. Peer support, self-help associations, and psychosocial counseling services are important to empowering individuals and promoting SDM. (4) Conclusions: SDM has the potential to improve the quality of mental healthcare. Barriers can be mitigated and new approaches for interventions in the psychiatric sector have been identified. This study has also shown the importance of understanding SDM as a process that should begin at the diagnostic phase.

[Expectations of guideline developers on living guidelines]

BACKGROUND

Guidelines are central pillars of high-quality care and care planning. The quality requirements for the development of guidelines and the associated effort are very high. Therefore, more efficient approaches are being forced.

OBJECTIVE

The opportunities and challenges in the introduction of a dynamic updating concept within the framework of the digitalization of guidelines were explored from the perspective of guideline developers in the field of psychiatry. This perspective should be included in the implementation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January and May 2022 a cross-sectional survey was conducted among guideline developers (N = 561, response 39%) based on a questionnaire developed and tested in advance. Data were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

A total of 60% were familiar with the concept of living guidelines. A large proportion endorsed a dynamic updating (83%) and digitalization (88%) of guidelines; however, various challenges are associated with the concept of living guidelines: the risk of inflationary changes (34%), the need for continuity of all actors (53%), involvement of patient and family representatives (37%) and definition of criteria regarding the decision what to change (38%). The vast majority (85%) thought it necessary that guideline development should be followed by implementation projects.

CONCLUSION

German guideline developers are very receptive regarding the implementation of living guidelines; however, they named numerous challenges, which need to be addressed in this approach.