The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2296-15-19) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The authors have no competing interests to declare.
All authors participated in the design and development of the protocol. MK and EE conducted the interviews, and MK, LH, AG, and AC analysed the data. MK drafted the manuscript, and all authors read and approved the final manuscript.
The potential of clinical practice guidelines has not been realized due to inconsistent adoption in clinical practice. Optimising intrinsic characteristics of guidelines (e.g., its wording and format) that are associated with uptake (as perceived by their end users) may have potential. Using findings from a realist review on guideline uptake and consultation with experts in guideline development, we designed a conceptual version of a future tool called Guideline Implementability Tool (GUIDE-IT). The tool will aim to involve family physicians in the guideline development process by providing a process to assess draft guideline recommendations. This feedback will then be given back to developers to consider when finalizing the recommendations. As guideline characteristics are best assessed by end-users, the objectives of the current study were to explore how family physicians perceive guideline implementability, and to determine what components should comprise the final GUIDE-IT prototype.
We conducted a qualitative study with family physicians inToronto, Ontario. Two experienced investigators conducted one-hour interviews with family physicians using a semi-structured interview guide to 1) elicit feedback on perceptions on guideline implementability; 2) to generate a discussion in response to three draft recommendations; and 3) to provide feedback on the conceptual GUIDE-IT. Sessions were audio taped and transcribed verbatim. Data collection and analysis were guided by content analyses.
20 family physicians participated. They perceived guideline uptake according to facilitators and barriers across 6 categories of guideline implementability (format, content, language, usability, development, and the practice environment). Participants’ feedback on 3 draft guideline recommendations were grouped according to guideline perception, cognition, and agreement. When asked to comment on GUIDE-IT, most respondents believed that the tool would be useful, but urged to involve “regular” or community family physicians in the process, and suggested that an online system would be the most efficient way to deliver it.
Our study identified facilitators and barriers of guideline implementability from the perspective of community and academic family physicians that will be used to build our GUIDE-IT prototype. Our findings build on current knowledge by showing that family physicians perceive guideline uptake mostly according to factors that are in the control of guideline developers.
Additional file 2: Draft guideline recommendations used to elicit feedback from family physician participants during interview sessions*.(DOC 33 KB)
Kendall E, Sunderland N, Muencheberger H, Armstrong K: When guidelines need guideance: considerations and strategies for improving the adoption of chronic disease evidence by general practitioners. J Eval Clin Prac. 2009, 15: 1082-1090. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01147.x. CrossRef
Gagliardi AR, Brouwers M, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM: An exploration of how guideline developer capacity and guideline implementability influence implementation and adoption: study protocol. Impl Sci. 2009, 4: 36-10.1186/1748-5908-4-36. CrossRef
Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, Whitty P, Eccles MP, Matowe L, Shirran L, Wensing M, Dijkstra R, Donaldson C: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004, 8 (6): 1-72. CrossRef
Schiffman R, Dixon J, Brandt C, et al: The Guideline Implementability Appraisal (GLIA): development of an instrument to identify obstacles to guideline implementation. BMC Med Info Dec Mak. 2005, 5: 23-10.1186/1472-6947-5-23. CrossRef
Kashyap N, Dixon J, Michel G, Brandt C, Shiffman RN: Guideline Implementability Appraisal v. 2.0. 2011, Yale Center for Medical Informatics, New Haven, CT, Available at: http://nutmeg.med.yale.edu/glia/doc/GLIA_v2.pdf. Accessed on June 10, 2013
van Dijk LJEW, Willianne LDM N, D’Hooghe TM, et al: The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis: an electronic guideline implementability appraisal. Implementation Science. 2011, 6: 7-10.1186/1748-5908-6-7. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Kastner M, Makarski J, Hayden L, Durocher L, Chatterjee A, Brouwers M, Bhattacharyya O: Making sense of complex data: a mapping process for analyzing findings of a realist review on guideline implementability. BMC Med Res Method. 2013, 13: 112-10.1186/1471-2288-13-112. CrossRef
Strauss AL, Corbin JM: Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 1998, California: Sage Publications Inc.
Oh B, Kang S: Information Design Textbook. 2008, Seoul: Ahn Graphics
Kang S: Framework for information design in the information age. Int J Humanit. 2005, 3 (2): 215-219.
Lugtenberg J, Zegers-van Schaick JM, Westert GP, Burgers JS: Why don’t physicians adhere to guideline recommendations in practice? An analysis of barriers among Dutch general practitioners. Impl Sci. 2009, 4: 54-10.1186/1748-5908-4-54. CrossRef
McKinlay E, McLeod D, Dowell A, Mashall C: Clinical practice guidelines’ development and use in New Zealand: an evolving process. N Z Med J. 2004, 117 (1199): 1-11.
Mazza D, Russell SJ: Are GPs using clinical practice guidelines?. Aust Fam Physician. 2001, 30 (8): 817-821. PubMed
Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJE, Mistiaen P: Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Dec Mak. 2008, 8: 38-10.1186/1472-6947-8-38. CrossRef
Fontanesi J, Messonnier M, Hill L, Shefer A: A new model of adoption of clinical practice guidelines. J Public Health Manage Pract. 2007, 13 (6): 605-611. 10.1097/01.PHH.0000296137.48929.a1. CrossRef
Smith L, Walker A, Gilhooly K: Clinical guidelines on depression: a qualitative study of GPs’ views. J Fam Pract. 2004, 53 (7): 556-561. PubMed
Wilson EJ, Nasrin D, Banwell C, Broom D, Douglas RM: Realities of practice: engaging parents and GPs in developing clinical practice guidelines. Aust Fam Physician. 2000, 29 (5): 498-503. PubMed
Guideline International Network: Patient and public involvement in guidelines. Available at: http://www.g-i-n.net/activities/gin-public/toolkit. Accessed on May 21, 2013
IOM (Institute of Medicine): Clinical Practice Guidelines We can Trust. 2011, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, Brief report available at: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Clinical-Practice-Guidelines-We-Can-Trust.aspx. Accessed on May 21, 2013
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): How we work. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/howwework/how_we_work.jsp. Accessed on May 21, 2013
Shenton AK: Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information. 2004, 22: 63-75.
- The development of a guideline implementability tool (GUIDE-IT): a qualitative study of family physician perspectives
Ian D Graham
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet Allgemeinmedizin
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet
Mail Icon II