Recommendations to improve use and dissemination of patient versions of oncological clinical practice guidelines in Germany: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.

Consumer health information Oncology Patient information Patient version of clinical practice guidelines Recommendations Workshop World café

Journal

BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 Sep 2024
Historique:
received: 27 11 2023
accepted: 26 08 2024
medline: 4 9 2024
pubmed: 4 9 2024
entrez: 3 9 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Oncological patients have high information needs that are often unmet. Patient versions of oncological clinical practice guidelines (PVG) translate clinical practice guidelines into laypersons' language and might help to address patients' information needs. Currently, 30 oncological PVG have been published in Germany and more are being developed. Following a large multi-phase project on oncological PVGs in Germany, recommendations to improve use and dissemination of PVG were adopted in a multi-stakeholder workshop. Organisations representing users of PVGs (patients, medical personnel, and multipliers), creators, initiators/funding organisations of PVGs, and organisations with methodological expertise in the development of clinical practice guidelines or in patient health information were invited to participate. The workshop included a World Café for discussion of pre-selected recommendations and structured consensus procedure for of all recommendations. Recommendations with agreement of > 75% were approved, and in case of ≤ 75% agreement, recommendations were rejected. The workshop took place on 24th April 2023 in Cologne, Germany. Overall, 23 people from 24 organisations participated in the discussion. Of 35 suggested recommendations 28 recommendations reached consensus and were approved. The recommendations referred to the topics dissemination (N = 13), design and format (N = 7), (digital) links (N = 5), digitalisation (N = 4), up-to-dateness (N = 3), and use of the PVG in collaboration between healthcare providers and patients (N = 3). The practical recommendations consider various perspectives and can help to improve use and dissemination of oncological PVG in Germany. The inclusion of different stakeholders could facilitate the transfer of the results into practice.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Oncological patients have high information needs that are often unmet. Patient versions of oncological clinical practice guidelines (PVG) translate clinical practice guidelines into laypersons' language and might help to address patients' information needs. Currently, 30 oncological PVG have been published in Germany and more are being developed. Following a large multi-phase project on oncological PVGs in Germany, recommendations to improve use and dissemination of PVG were adopted in a multi-stakeholder workshop.
METHODS METHODS
Organisations representing users of PVGs (patients, medical personnel, and multipliers), creators, initiators/funding organisations of PVGs, and organisations with methodological expertise in the development of clinical practice guidelines or in patient health information were invited to participate. The workshop included a World Café for discussion of pre-selected recommendations and structured consensus procedure for of all recommendations. Recommendations with agreement of > 75% were approved, and in case of ≤ 75% agreement, recommendations were rejected.
RESULTS RESULTS
The workshop took place on 24th April 2023 in Cologne, Germany. Overall, 23 people from 24 organisations participated in the discussion. Of 35 suggested recommendations 28 recommendations reached consensus and were approved. The recommendations referred to the topics dissemination (N = 13), design and format (N = 7), (digital) links (N = 5), digitalisation (N = 4), up-to-dateness (N = 3), and use of the PVG in collaboration between healthcare providers and patients (N = 3).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The practical recommendations consider various perspectives and can help to improve use and dissemination of oncological PVG in Germany. The inclusion of different stakeholders could facilitate the transfer of the results into practice.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39227851
doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19893-w
pii: 10.1186/s12889-024-19893-w
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2393

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Faller H, Koch U, Brähler E, Härter M, Keller M, Schulz H, et al. Satisfaction with information and unmet information needs in men and women with cancer. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(1):62–70.
doi: 10.1007/s11764-015-0451-1 pubmed: 25956402
Halbach SM, Enders A, Kowalski C, Pförtner T-K, Pfaff H, Wesselmann S, et al. Health literacy and fear of cancer progression in elderly women newly diagnosed with breast cancer–A longitudinal analysis. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99 5:855–62.
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.12.012
Kent EE, Arora NK, Rowland JH, Bellizzi KM, Forsythe LP, Hamilton AS, et al. Health information needs and health-related quality of life in a diverse population of long-term cancer survivors. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;89(2):345–52.
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.08.014 pubmed: 23021856 pmcid: 4560240
Rood JAJ, Eeltink CM, van Zuuren FJ, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Huijgens PC. Perceived need for information of patients with haematological malignancies: a literature review. J Clin Nurs. 2015;24(3–4):353–69.
doi: 10.1111/jocn.12630 pubmed: 24890671
Husson O, Mols F, Van de Poll-Franse L. The relation between information provision and health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression among cancer survivors: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(4):761–72.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq413 pubmed: 20870912
Wang T, Molassiotis A, Chung BPM, Tan J-Y. Unmet care needs of advanced cancer patients and their informal caregivers: a systematic review. BMC Palliat care. 2018;17(1):1–29.
doi: 10.1186/s12904-018-0346-9
Yatim F, Cristofalo P, Minvielle E. What are the unmet information needs of cancer patients? A qualitative study. Global J Health Sci. 2017;9(12):114.
doi: 10.5539/gjhs.v9n12p114
Guidelines International Network (GIN). GIN Public Toolkit. Patient and public involvement in guidelines. 2021 https://g-i-n.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Toolkit-combined.pdf
Fervers B, Carretier J, Bataillard A. Clinical practice guidelines. J Visc Surg. 2010;147(6):e341–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2010.10.010 pubmed: 21093403
Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P. Guidelines International Network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(7):525–31.
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00009 pubmed: 22473437
Institute of Medicine. Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies; 2011.
Institute of Medicine Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice. G. Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Program. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Washington (DC), USA: The National Academies Press; 1990.
Santesso N, Morgano GP, Jack SM, Haynes RB, Hill S, Treweek S, et al. Dissemination of clinical practice guidelines: a content analysis of patient versions. Med Decis Mak. 2016;36(6):692–702.
doi: 10.1177/0272989X16644427
Fearns N, Kelly J, Callaghan M, Graham K, Loudon K, Harbour R et al. What do patients and the public know about clinical practice guidelines and what do they want from them? A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1).
Liira H, Saarelma O, Callaghan M, Harbour R, Jousimaa J, Kunnamo I, et al. Patients, health information, and guidelines: a focus-group study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2015;33(3):212–9.
doi: 10.3109/02813432.2015.1067517 pubmed: 26205344 pmcid: 4750726
German Cancer Aid. Ordering information material. 2023 https://www.krebshilfe.de/informieren/ueber-krebs/infothek/infomaterial-kategorie/patientenleitlinien/
German Guideline Program in Oncology (GGPO). Patient versions of clinical guidelines. 2023 https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/patientenleitlinien/
Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin (ÄZQ). Office des Leitlinienprogramms Onkologie (OL), AWMF-Institut für Medizinisches Wissensmanagement (AWMF-IMWi). Erstellung von Patientenleitlinien zu S3-Leitlinien/NVL im Rahmen der Leitlinienprogramme. Methodenreport. 2. Auflage, Version 1. https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Downloads/Methodik/Erstellung-PLL-NVL-OL-MR_2Aufl.pdf 2019.
Meyer N, Hellbrecht I, Breuing J, Hauprich J, Wahlen S, Könsgen N, et al. Heterogeneous methodology in the development of patient versions of clinical practice guidelines-a scoping review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2023;161:53–64.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.07.005 pubmed: 37482111
Becker M, Buhn S, Meyer N, Blodt S, Carl G, Follmann M, et al. Investigating the role and applicability of patient versions of guidelines in oncology and deriving recommendations for the development, dissemination and implementation of patient versions in Germany: protocol for multiphase study. BMJ Open. 2022;12(3):e059040.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059040 pubmed: 35296489 pmcid: 8928290
The World Café Community Foundation. The World Café™ 2018 http://www.theworldcafe.com
Wahlen S, Breuing J, Becker M et al. Use, applicability, and dissemination of patient versions of clinical practice guidelines in oncology in Germany: a qualitative interview study with healthcare providers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2024;24(1): 272
Zschorlich B, Gechter D, Janßen IM, Swinehart T, Wiegard B, Koch K. Health information on the internet: who is searching for what, when and how? Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung Und Qualitat Im Gesundheitswesen. 2015;109(2):144–52.
Brashers DE, Goldsmith DJ, Hsieh E. Information seeking and avoiding in Health contexts. Hum Commun Res. 2002;28(2):258–71.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00807.x
Krieger T, Salm S, Dresen A, Cecon N. Cancer patients’ experiences and preferences when receiving bad news: a qualitative study. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2023;149(7):3859–70.
doi: 10.1007/s00432-022-04311-8 pubmed: 35999331
Newman B. Using easy read information about mental health for people with intellectual disability. UNSW Sydney; 2020.
Horch K. Searching for health information on the internet-results from the KomPaS study. J Health Monit. 2021;6(2):67.
pubmed: 35146312 pmcid: 8734104
Pieper D, Jülich F, Antoine S-L, Bächle C, Chernyak N, Genz J, et al. Studies analysing the need for health-related information in Germany-a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):1–18.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-1076-9
Fearns N, Graham K, Johnston G. Improving the user experience of patient versions of clinical guidelines: user testing of a Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) patient version. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;16(1):1–10.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1287-8

Auteurs

Nadja Könsgen (N)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany. nadja.koensgen@uni-wh.de.

Julia Hauprich (J)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Sarah Wahlen (S)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Irma Hellbrecht (I)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Monika Becker (M)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Stefanie Bühn (S)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Nora Meyer (N)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Susanne Blödt (S)

Institute for Medical Knowledge Management c/o Philipps University Marburg, Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany, Marburg/Berlin, Germany.

Günther Carl (G)

German Prostate Cancer Support Group, Bonn, Germany.

Markus Follmann (M)

Office of the German Guideline Program in Oncology (GGPO), German Cancer Society, Berlin, Germany.

Stefanie Frenz (S)

Frauenselbsthilfe Krebs-Bundesverband e.V, Bonn, Germany.

Thomas Langer (T)

Office of the German Guideline Program in Oncology (GGPO), German Cancer Society, Berlin, Germany.

Monika Nothacker (M)

Institute for Medical Knowledge Management c/o Philipps University Marburg, Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany, Marburg/Berlin, Germany.

Corinna Schaefer (C)

German Agency for Quality in Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Dawid Pieper (D)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.
Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Rüdersdorf, Germany.
Centre for Health Services Research, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany.

Jessica Breuing (J)

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH