Literature DB >> 32179610

Factors Influencing Uptake of Changes to Clinical Preventive Guidelines.

Vivian Jiang1, E Marshall Brooks2, Sebastian T Tong2, John Heintzman2, Alex H Krist2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread recognition that adherence to clinical preventive guidelines improves patient outcomes, clinicians struggle to implement guideline changes in a timely manner. Multiple factors influence guideline adoption and effective implementation. However, few studies evaluate their collective and inter-related effects. This qualitative study provides a comprehensive picture of the interplay between multiple factors on uptake of new or changed preventive guidelines.
METHODS: Semistructured interviews conducted in 2018 with a diverse sample of clinicians and practice leaders sought to understand patient, clinician, practice, health system, environment, and guideline factors of influence. An immersion-crystallization approach was used to identify emergent themes.
RESULTS: Interviewees expressed motivation to adhere to guidelines but also valued sharing decisions with patients. Personal biases and fears affected both clinician and patient guideline adoption. Practices facilitated implementation through workflow optimization and encouraging a culture of evidence-based practice while a key health system function was to maintain electronic health record alerts. More traditional environmental factors, such as insurance coverage or transportation, were less of a barrier to guideline adoption and implementation than the influence of media and specialists. Various specific guideline characteristics also affected ease of adoption and implementation. Different settings expressed greater health system, practice, or clinician-centric approaches to guideline implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: Guideline uptake is influenced by a complex interplay of multiple levels of factors including the patient, clinician, practice, health system, environment, and guideline levels. Comprehensively understanding all levels of influence for each specific clinical setting may help to determine the optimal intervention(s) for improving uptake of evidence-based guidelines. © Copyright 2020 by the American Board of Family Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evidence-Based Medicine; Implementation Science; Preventive Medicine; Qualitative Research

Year:  2020        PMID: 32179610     DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2020.02.190146

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med        ISSN: 1557-2625            Impact factor:   2.657


  4 in total

1.  Dissemination of Evidence-Based Recommendations for Sickle Cell Disease to Primary Care and Emergency Department Providers in North Carolina: A Cost Benefit Analysis.

Authors:  Paula Tanabe; Audrey L Blewer; Emily Bonnabeau; Hayden B Bosworth; Denise H Clayton; Nancy Crego; Marian F Earls; Kern Eason; Grayson Forlines; Gary Rains; Matthew Young; Nirmish Shah
Journal:  J Health Econ Outcomes Res       Date:  2021-04-01

2.  Clinicians' opinions on recommending aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer to Australians aged 50-70 years: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Shakira Milton; Jennifer McIntosh; Thivagar Yogaparan; Pavithran Alphonse; Sibel Saya; Napin Karnchanachari; Peter Nguyen; Phyllis Lau; Finlay Macrae; Jon Emery
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Iowa Implementation for Sustainability Framework.

Authors:  Laura Cullen; Kirsten Hanrahan; Stephanie W Edmonds; Heather Schacht Reisinger; Michele Wagner
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  An implementation framework and a feasibility evaluation of a clinical decision support system for diabetes management in secondary mental healthcare using CogStack.

Authors:  Dipen Patel; Yamiko J Msosa; Tao Wang; Omar G Mustafa; Siobhan Gee; Julie Williams; Angus Roberts; Richard Jb Dobson; Fiona Gaughran
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 2.796

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.