scholarly journals A knowledge synthesis of patient and public involvement in clinical practice guidelines: study protocol

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
France Légaré ◽  
Antoine Boivin ◽  
Trudy van der Weijden ◽  
Christine Packenham ◽  
Sylvie Tapp ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Hanin Farhana Kamaruzaman ◽  
Ku Nurhasni Ku Abd Rahim ◽  
Izzuna Mudla Mohamed Ghazali ◽  
Mohd Aminuddin Mohd Yusof

Abstract Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health technology assessment (HTA) is widely promoted to ensure that all health-related decisions are made after taking into consideration the viewpoints of important stakeholders. In Malaysia, patients or their representatives have been involved in the development of HTA and Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) since 2009 and their influences have been growing steadily over the years. This paper aimed to describe the journey, achievements, challenges, and future direction of the PPI throughout all stages of the development and implementation of HTA and CPG in Malaysia. Currently, in Malaysia, patients or their representatives are mainly involved during the initial development of HTA and CPG drafts as well as during the internal and external reviews. Additionally, they are also encouraged to be involved during the implementation of HTA and CPG recommendations. Although their involvement in this aspect has slowly increased over time, challenges remain in the form of limited representativeness of selected patients or carers, uncertainty on the level of patient involvement allowed during the HTA/CPG development processes, and limited health literacy, which affect their ability to contribute meaningfully throughout the processes. Continuous improvement in these processes is important as patients or their representatives play a pivotal role in ensuring transparency, accountability, and credibility throughout the HTA/CPG development and decision-making processes.


2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. E45-E74 ◽  
Author(s):  
France Légaré ◽  
Antoine Boivin ◽  
Trudy van der Weijden ◽  
Christine Pakenham ◽  
Jako Burgers ◽  
...  

Background. The role of patient and public involvement programs (PPIPs) in developing and implementing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) has generated great interest. Purpose. The authors sought to identify key components of PPIPs used in developing and implementing CPGs. Data sources. The authors searched bibliographic databases and contacted relevant organizations. Study selection. In total, 2161 articles and reports were retrieved on PPIPs in the development and implementation of CPGs. Of these, 71 qualified for inclusion in the review. Data extraction. Reviewers independently extracted data on key components of PPIPs and barriers and facilitators to their operation. Data synthesis. Over half of the studies were published after 2002, and more than half originated from the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Germany. CPGs that involved patients and the public addressed a variety of health problems, especially mental health and cancer. The most frequently cited objective for using PPIPs in developing CPGs was to incorporate patients’ values or perspectives in CPG recommendations. Patients and their families and caregivers were the parties most often involved. Methods used to recruit PPIP participants included soliciting through patient/public organizations, sending invitations, and receiving referrals and recruits from clinicians. Patients and the public most often participated by taking part in a CPG working group, workshop, meeting, seminar, literature review, or consultation such as a focus group, individual interview, or survey. Patients and the public principally helped formulate recommendations and revise drafts. Limitations. The authors did not contact the authors of the studies. Conclusion. This literature review provides an extensive knowledge base for making PPIPs more effective when developing and implementing CPGs. More research is needed to assess the impact of PPIPs and resources they require.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (20) ◽  
pp. 2563-2568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley N. Reames ◽  
Robert W. Krell ◽  
Sarah N. Ponto ◽  
Sandra L. Wong

Purpose Significant concerns exist regarding the content and reliability of oncology clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report “Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust” established standards for developing trustworthy CPGs. By using these standards as a benchmark, we sought to evaluate recent oncology guidelines. Methods CPGs and consensus statements addressing the screening, evaluation, or management of the four leading causes of cancer-related mortality in the United States (lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers) published between January 2005 and December 2010 were identified. A standardized scoring system based on the eight IOM standards was used to critically evaluate the methodology, content, and disclosure policies of CPGs. All CPGs were given two scores; points were awarded for eight standards and 20 subcriteria. Results No CPG fully met all the IOM standards. The average overall scores were 2.75 of 8 possible standards and 8.24 of 20 possible subcriteria. Less than half the CPGs were based on a systematic review. Only half the CPG panels addressed conflicts of interest. Most did not comply with standards for inclusion of patient and public involvement in the development or review process, nor did they specify their process for updating. CPGs were most consistent with IOM standards for transparency, articulation of recommendations, and use of external review. Conclusion The vast majority of oncology CPGs fail to meet the IOM standards for trustworthy guidelines. On the basis of these results, there is still much to be done to make guidelines as methodologically sound and evidence-based as possible.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e037327
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Ann Bryant ◽  
Anna Mae Scott ◽  
Rae Thomas

IntroductionClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are intended to optimise patient care by recommending care pathways based on the best available research evidence and practice experience. Patient and public involvement (PPI) in healthcare is recommended based on the expectation that it will improve the quality and relevance of outcomes. There is no consensus on what constitutes meaningful and effective PPI in CPG. We will conduct a scoping review to identify and synthesise knowledge in four key areas: who have been the patients and public previously involved in CPG development, how were they recruited, at what stage in the CPG process were they involved and how were they involved. This knowledge will inform a general model of PPI in CPG to inform CPGs development.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a scoping review using the Methodology for Scoping Reviews refined by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Searches will be conducted in electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO). National standards for developing CPGs from Australia, UK, Canada and the USA will also be identified. A forward and backward citation search will be conducted on the included studies and national standards. Abstracts and full-text studies will be independently screened by two researchers. Extracted data will include study details, type of clinical guideline and the four key areas, which patients and public were involved, how were they recruited, at what stage were they included and how they were involved. Data will be narratively synthesised.Ethics and disseminationAs a scoping review, this study does not require ethics approval. We intend to disseminate the results through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations. Furthermore, we will use the findings from our scoping review to inform future research to fill key evidence gaps identified by this review.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nannan Shi ◽  
Linda L. D. Zhong ◽  
XueJie Han ◽  
Tat Chi Ziea ◽  
Bacon Ng ◽  
...  

We presented a study protocol of developing Chinese medicine clinical practice guidelines for three common diseases in Hong Kong, including insomnia, chronic gastritis, and cerebral infarction. This research project will be conducted in three phases. First phase is the preparation stage which consists of the establishment of steering committee and panel. Second phase involves 6 steps, which are searching and identifying evidence, text mining process, Delphi survey, synthesizing of data, consensus conference, and drafting guidelines. In this phase, text mining technique, evidence-based method, and formal consensus method are combined to get consolidated supporting data as the source of CM CPGs. The final phase comprised external reviews, dissemination, and updating. The outputs from this project will provide three CM CPGs for insomnia, chronic gastritis, and cerebral infarction for Hong Kong local use.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6020-6020
Author(s):  
Bradley Norman Reames ◽  
Robert Wallace Krell ◽  
Sarah Nicks Ponto ◽  
Sandra L. Wong

6020 Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) play an essential role in cancer care today, but there are significant concerns regarding their content and reliability. In 2011, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report “Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust” created standards for developing trustworthy CPGs. Using these standards as a benchmark, we sought to evaluate recent oncology guidelines. Methods: CPGs and consensus statements addressing the screening, evaluation or management of the four leading causes of cancer-related mortality in the US (non-small cell lung, breast, prostate and colorectal cancers) published between January 2005 and December 2010 were identified using MEDLINE. A standardized scoring system based on the eight standards set forth by the IOM was devised, and the methodology, content and disclosure policies of CPGs were critically evaluated by four independent reviewers. All CPGs were given two scores; points were awarded out of a possible 8 major criteria and 20 sub-criteria. Results: We identified 168 CPGs for inclusion in the study; 45% were from US groups. None of the CPGs fully met all the IOM standards. On average, CPGs only met 2.8 of 8 standards set forth by the IOM (mean 2.8 points out of 8, SD 1.7; 8.3 out of 20, SD 4.3). Less than half of CPGs were based on a systematic review. Only half of CPG panels addressed conflicts of interest. Overall, the CPGs were most consistent with IOM standards for transparency regarding the development process, articulation of recommendations, and use of external review. Most did not comply with standards for inclusion of patient and public involvement in the development or review process, nor did they specify their process for updating. CPGs from the US had higher overall scores than CPGs from international groups. CPGs addressing non-small cell lung cancer had higher overall scores (mean 3.9) than those for other cancers. Conclusions: The vast majority of oncology CPGs fails to meet the IOM standards for trustworthy guidelines. Notably, most CPGs are not based on systematic reviews, lack full disclosure, and do not include all relevant stakeholders in the guideline process. This highlights the need for improved CPG development processes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 1006-1010
Author(s):  
Jennifer Raminick ◽  
Hema Desai

Purpose Infants hospitalized for an acute respiratory illness often require the use of noninvasive respiratory support during the initial stage to improve their breathing. High flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) is becoming a more popular means of noninvasive respiratory support, often used to treat respiratory syncytial virus/bronchiolitis. These infants present with tachypnea and coughing, resulting in difficulties in coordinating sucking and swallowing. However, they are often allowed to feed orally despite having high respiratory rate, increased work of breathing and on HFOT, placing them at risk for aspiration. Feeding therapists who work with these infants have raised concerns that HFOT creates an additional risk factor for swallowing dysfunction, especially with infants who have compromised airways or other comorbidities. There is emerging literature concluding changes in pharyngeal pressures with HFOT, as well as aspiration in preterm neonates who are on nasal continuous positive airway pressure. However, there is no existing research exploring the effect of HFOT on swallowing in infants with acute respiratory illness. This discussion will present findings from literature on HFOT, oral feeding in the acutely ill infant population, and present clinical practice guidelines for safe feeding during critical care admission for acute respiratory illness. Conclusion Guidelines for safety of oral feeds for infants with acute respiratory illness on HFOT do not exist. However, providers and parents continue to want to provide oral feeds despite clinical signs of respiratory distress and coughing. To address this challenge, we initiated a process change to use clinical bedside evaluation and a “cross-systems approach” to provide recommendations for safer oral feeds while on HFOT as the infant is recovering from illness. Use of standardized feeding evaluation and protocol have improved consistency of practice within our department. However, further research is still necessary to develop clinical practice guidelines for safe oral feeding for infants on HFOT.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document