The effectiveness of computerized clinical guidelines in the process of care: a systematic review

Introduction: Virtual consultations (VC) have been embraced by healthcare organisations during the COVID-19 pandemic. VC allows continuation of patient care while adhering to government advised restrictions and social distancing measures. Multidisciplinary pain management programmes (PMPs) are a core element of many pain services and utilising virtual methods to deliver PMPs has allowed them to continue to provide care. This systematic review aimed to explore the content of existing virtually delivered PMPs and discuss if and how these findings can be used to guide clinical delivery. Methods: Eligible studies included adults (aged ⩾18 years) with persistent musculoskeletal pain and any virtually delivered intervention that was described as a PMP or that had components of PMPs. Databases were searched from inception until July 2020. We performed a content analysis comparing existing interventions with established evidence-based clinical guidelines published by the British Pain Society (BPS). Intervention reporting quality was assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist: an established checklist developed to improve the completeness of the reporting of interventions. Results: Eight studies were included. One intervention included six of the seven components recommended by the BPS; none included all seven. ‘Skills training and activity management’ was present in all eight interventions; ‘education’ and ‘cognitive therapy methods’ were present in six interventions; ‘graded activation’ and ‘methods to enhance acceptance, mindfulness and psychological flexibility’ were present in four interventions; ‘physical exercise’ was present in two interventions and ‘graded exposure’ was present in one intervention. None of the studies described all 12 items of the TIDieR checklist adequately enough for replication. Conclusion: Published virtual PMPs partially meet established clinical guidelines. Future virtual PMPs should be based on evidence-based clinical guidelines, and more research is needed to explore the effectiveness of virtually delivered PMPs and each recommended component.

Download Full-text

Systematic review of the quality of clinical guidelines for aphasia in stroke management

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice ◽

10.1111/jep.12023 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 19 (6) ◽

pp. 994-1003 ◽

Cited By ~ 28

Author(s):

Alexia Rohde ◽

Linda Worrall ◽

Guylaine Le Dorze

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Guidelines ◽

Stroke Management

Download Full-text

Recommendations for exercises in hand osteoarthritis: a systematic review protocol of clinical guidelines and consensus recommendations

Physical Therapy Reviews ◽

10.1080/10833196.2018.1482997 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 23 (3) ◽

pp. 207-213 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Beatrice E. A. Sankah ◽

Maria Stokes ◽

Joanna Adams

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Guidelines ◽

Hand Osteoarthritis ◽

Systematic Review Protocol ◽

Consensus Recommendations ◽

Review Protocol

Download Full-text

Cervical priming before surgical abortion between 14 and 24 weeks: A systematic review and meta-analyses for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) – new clinical guidelines for England.

American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM ◽

10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100283 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 100283

Author(s):

Laura E. O’SHEA ◽

Patricia A. LOHR ◽

Jonathan LORD ◽

Elise HASLER ◽

Sharon CAMERON

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Guidelines ◽

Cervical Priming ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Surgical Abortion

Download Full-text

The challenges of guidelines: A look at the systematic review of clinical guidelines related to the care of individuals with cerebral palsy

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation ◽

10.1016/j.apmr.2020.12.006 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Peter Rosenbaum

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cerebral Palsy ◽

Clinical Guidelines

Download Full-text

Innovating in healthcare delivery: a systematic review and a preference-based framework of patient and provider needs

BMJ Innovations ◽

10.1136/bmjinnov-2018-000334 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 5 (2-3) ◽

pp. 92-100

Author(s):

Joseph S Salama ◽

Alex Lee ◽

Ashkan Afshin

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Quality Of Care ◽

Conceptual Framework ◽

Unmet Needs ◽

Healthcare Delivery ◽

Process Of Care ◽

Literature Reviews ◽

Reducing Costs ◽

Healthcare Innovation

Healthcare innovation is becoming a popular but poorly defined option for those who are seeking new ways of reducing costs while also improving the quality of care. The process of innovating in healthcare delivery can be improved by identifying and understanding the unmet needs of patients and providers. We conducted two systematic literature reviews to identify the needs of these stakeholders throughout healthcare delivery and developed a conceptual framework for innovating in healthcare. Our results reveal tension between patients’ and providers’ preferences across three major categories—treatment and outcomes, process of care and structure of care. Therefore, innovating in healthcare may be better understood as addressing the unmet needs of each stakeholder by easing or eliminating tensions between stakeholders. This conceptual framework may serve as a useful instrument for health policymakers, payers and innovators to alike make better decisions as they invest in healthcare innovations.

Download Full-text