Strengthening prehospital clinical practice guideline implementation in South Africa: a qualitative case study.
Case study
Emergency medicine
Guideline adaptation
Guideline development
Guidelines
Paramedic
Prehospital
Qualitative
Recommendations
South Africa
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Apr 2020
24 Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
20
08
2019
accepted:
13
03
2020
entrez:
26
4
2020
pubmed:
26
4
2020
medline:
20
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Methods on developing new (de novo) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have received substantial attention. However, research into alternative methods of CPG development using existing CPG documents (CPG adaptation) - a specific issue for guideline development groups in low- and middle-income countries - is sparse. There are only a few examples showcasing the pragmatic application of such alternative approaches in settings with time and budget constraints, especially in the prehospital setting. This paper aims to describe and strengthen the methods of developing prehospital CPGs using alternative guideline development methods through a case study design. We qualitatively explored a CPG development project conducted in 2016 for prehospital providers in South Africa as a case study. Key stakeholders, involved in various processes of the guideline project, were purposefully sampled. Data were collected from one focus group and six in-depth interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. Overarching themes and sub-themes were inductively developed and categorised as challenges and recommendations and further transformed into action points. Key challenges revolved around guideline implementation as opposed to development. These included the unavoidable effect of interest and beliefs on implementing recommendations, the local evidence void, a shifting implementation context, and opposing end-user needs. Guideline development and implementation strengthening priority actions included: i) developing a national end-user document; ii) aligning recommendations with local practice; iii) communicating a clear and consistent message; iv) addressing controversial recommendations; v) managing the impact of interests, beliefs and intellectual conflicts; and vi) transparently reporting implementation decisions. The cornerstone of a successful guideline development process is the translation and implementation of CPG recommendations into clinical practice. We highlight key priority actions for prehospital guideline development teams with limited resources to strengthen guideline development, dissemination, and implementation by drawing from lessons learnt from a prehospital guideline project conducted in South Africa.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Methods on developing new (de novo) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have received substantial attention. However, research into alternative methods of CPG development using existing CPG documents (CPG adaptation) - a specific issue for guideline development groups in low- and middle-income countries - is sparse. There are only a few examples showcasing the pragmatic application of such alternative approaches in settings with time and budget constraints, especially in the prehospital setting. This paper aims to describe and strengthen the methods of developing prehospital CPGs using alternative guideline development methods through a case study design.
METHODS
METHODS
We qualitatively explored a CPG development project conducted in 2016 for prehospital providers in South Africa as a case study. Key stakeholders, involved in various processes of the guideline project, were purposefully sampled. Data were collected from one focus group and six in-depth interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. Overarching themes and sub-themes were inductively developed and categorised as challenges and recommendations and further transformed into action points.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Key challenges revolved around guideline implementation as opposed to development. These included the unavoidable effect of interest and beliefs on implementing recommendations, the local evidence void, a shifting implementation context, and opposing end-user needs. Guideline development and implementation strengthening priority actions included: i) developing a national end-user document; ii) aligning recommendations with local practice; iii) communicating a clear and consistent message; iv) addressing controversial recommendations; v) managing the impact of interests, beliefs and intellectual conflicts; and vi) transparently reporting implementation decisions.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The cornerstone of a successful guideline development process is the translation and implementation of CPG recommendations into clinical practice. We highlight key priority actions for prehospital guideline development teams with limited resources to strengthen guideline development, dissemination, and implementation by drawing from lessons learnt from a prehospital guideline project conducted in South Africa.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32331525
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05111-x
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05111-x
pmc: PMC7183123
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
349Références
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;81:101-110
pubmed: 27713072
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jan 29;18(1):48
pubmed: 29378586
BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 24;9(9):e031767
pubmed: 31551391
S Afr Med J. 2017 Aug 25;107(9):745-746
pubmed: 28875879
J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Mar;34(3):458-463
pubmed: 30565151
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Jun 6;17(1):56
pubmed: 31170992
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Apr 3;156(7):525-31
pubmed: 22473437
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Feb 20;3(Suppl 5):e001093
pubmed: 30899556
CMAJ. 2010 Feb 9;182(2):E78-84
pubmed: 19969563
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Aug 29;17(1):608
pubmed: 28851365
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Jun 28;19(1):134
pubmed: 31253087
BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 3;7(11):e016124
pubmed: 29102984
BMC Res Notes. 2018 Feb 05;11(1):97
pubmed: 29402334
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 22;14(7):e0219761
pubmed: 31329643
CMAJ. 2019 Apr 1;191(13):E350-E351
pubmed: 30936164
Gac Sanit. 2018 Mar - Apr;32(2):166.e1-166.e10
pubmed: 28822594
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Mar;83:24-30
pubmed: 27349186
Afr J Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;7(3):93-99
pubmed: 30456117
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2019 Jul 10;:
pubmed: 31292208
CMAJ. 2014 Feb 18;186(3):E123-42
pubmed: 24344144
Afr J Emerg Med. 2016 Sep;6(3):113-115
pubmed: 30456076
BMJ. 2016 Mar 08;352:i1152
pubmed: 26957104
BMC Public Health. 2017 Nov 20;17(Suppl 5):869
pubmed: 29219094
Afr J Emerg Med. 2016 Jun;6(2):61-63
pubmed: 30456068
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Oct 6;163(7):548-53
pubmed: 26436619
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Sep 15;15(1):79
pubmed: 28915890
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Oct 17;3(Suppl 5):e000962
pubmed: 30364419
BMJ. 2000 Jan 1;320(7226):50-2
pubmed: 10617534
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
PLoS Med. 2015 Oct 27;12(10):e1001895
pubmed: 26506244
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Jun 1;152(11):738-41
pubmed: 20479011
S Afr Med J. 2018 Nov 26;108(12):1036-1041
pubmed: 30606288