Syed Muhammad Umar Nasser1, Graham Cooke1, Katharina Kranzer2, Susan L Norris3, Piero Olliaro4, Nathan Ford5. 1. Division of Infectious Diseases, St Mary's Campus, Imperial College London, Paddington, London, United Kingdom. 2. Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom. 3. Guidelines Review Committee Secretariat, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland. 4. UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme on Research & Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland; Centre for Tropical Medicine, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 5. Department of HIV/AIDS, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland. Electronic address: fordn@who.int.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study assesses the extent to which the strength of a recommendation in a World Health Organization (WHO) guideline affects uptake of the recommendation in national guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The uptake of recommendations included in HIV and TB guidelines issued by WHO from 2009 to 2013 was assessed across guidelines from 20 low- and middle-income countries in Africa and Southeast Asia. Associations between characteristics of recommendations (strength, quality of the evidence, type) and uptake were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Eight WHO guidelines consisting of 109 strong recommendations and 49 conditional recommendations were included, and uptake assessed across 44 national guidelines (1,255 recommendations) from 20 countries. Uptake of WHO recommendations in national guidelines was 82% for strong recommendations and 61% for conditional recommendations. The odds of uptake comparing strong recommendations and conditional recommendations was 1.9 (95% confidence interval: 1.4, 2.7), after adjustment for quality of evidence. Higher levels of evidence quality were associated with greater uptake, independent of recommendation strength. CONCLUSION: Guideline developers should be confident that conditional recommendations are frequently adopted. The fact that strong recommendations are more frequently adopted than conditional recommendations underscores the importance of ensuring that such recommendations are justified.
OBJECTIVES: This study assesses the extent to which the strength of a recommendation in a World Health Organization (WHO) guideline affects uptake of the recommendation in national guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The uptake of recommendations included in HIV and TB guidelines issued by WHO from 2009 to 2013 was assessed across guidelines from 20 low- and middle-income countries in Africa and Southeast Asia. Associations between characteristics of recommendations (strength, quality of the evidence, type) and uptake were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Eight WHO guidelines consisting of 109 strong recommendations and 49 conditional recommendations were included, and uptake assessed across 44 national guidelines (1,255 recommendations) from 20 countries. Uptake of WHO recommendations in national guidelines was 82% for strong recommendations and 61% for conditional recommendations. The odds of uptake comparing strong recommendations and conditional recommendations was 1.9 (95% confidence interval: 1.4, 2.7), after adjustment for quality of evidence. Higher levels of evidence quality were associated with greater uptake, independent of recommendation strength. CONCLUSION: Guideline developers should be confident that conditional recommendations are frequently adopted. The fact that strong recommendations are more frequently adopted than conditional recommendations underscores the importance of ensuring that such recommendations are justified.
Authors: Steve Kanters; Nathan Ford; Eric Druyts; Kristian Thorlund; Edward J Mills; Nick Bansback Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Maria Cecilia Dedios; Alexo Esperato; Luz Maria De-Regil; Juan Pablo Peña-Rosas; Susan L Norris Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-03-21 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Ein Soon Shin; Ji Eun Jang; Ji Yun Yeon; Da Sol Kim; Sung Goo Chang; Yoon Seong Lee Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2018-02-19 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Thomas Agoritsas; Arnaud Merglen; Anja Fog Heen; Annette Kristiansen; Ignacio Neumann; Juan P Brito; Romina Brignardello-Petersen; Paul E Alexander; David M Rind; Per O Vandvik; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 2.692