To fMRI or not to fMRI? A flowchart translating guidelines for management of patients with Disorders of Consciousness into routine practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin M Monti ◽  
Caroline Schnakers
Keyword(s):  
Routine Care ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Disorder Of Consciousness ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Guiding Principle ◽  
Medical Centers ◽  
New Guidelines ◽  
American Academy Of Neurology

The American Academy of Neurology and the European Academy of Neurology have now recognized, for the very first time, the value of advanced neuroimaging and electrophysiology techniques (AIEs) in the context of diagnosing patients with a disorder of consciousness (DOC). This recognition is part of an important agenda of promoting evidence-based competency in the management of DOC patients. Nonetheless, considering these techniques (and the required know-how) are seldom available outside of advanced medical centers, it is important to provide physicians with a framework for balancing risks and benefits and deciding, on a single patient basis, whether AIEs are suitable. This issue is all the more urgent considering that family members are increasingly aware of the use of AIEs in DOC patients, that pressure for these assessments is likely to increase in the context of legal proceedings, and that pathways for reimbursement for such assessments in DOC are yet to be established. The new guidelines, however, provide no guiding principle for physicians to decide when such assessments are appropriate, a limitation that impedes their wide adoption. We address this important gap by proposing an easy to use algorithmic flowchart, tightly based on the new guidelines, to evaluate the appropriateness of AIEs for any given DOC patient in the context of routine care and to help ensure that evidence-based best practices are being followed in the diagnostic process. In addition, we also provide a brief context for understanding the main categories of AIEs available to clinicians, their advantages, and their limitations.

Tailored interventions to support the implementation of the German national guideline on screening, diagnosis and treatment of alcohol-related disorders: a project protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 373-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernd Schulte ◽  
Christina Lindemann ◽  
Angela Buchholz ◽  
Anke Rosahl ◽  
Martin Härter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Guideline Implementation ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Advisory Boards ◽  
Prevention And Treatment

Abstract. Background: The German Guideline on Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorders aims to increase the uptake of evidence-based interventions for the early identification, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of alcohol-related disorders in relevant healthcare settings. To date, dissemination has not been accompanied by a guideline implementation strategy. The aim of this study is to develop tailored guideline implementation strategies and to field-test these in relevant medical and psycho-social settings in the city of Bremen, Germany. Methods: The study will conduct an impact and needs assessment of healthcare provision for alcohol use orders in Bremen, drawing on a range of secondary and primary data to: evaluate existing healthcare services; model the potential impact of improved care on public health outcomes; and identify potential barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence-based guidelines. Community advisory boards will be established for the selection of single-component or multi-faceted guideline implementation strategies. The tailoring approach considers guideline, provider and organizational factors shaping implementation. In field tests quality outcome indicators of the delivery of evidence-based interventions will be evaluated accompanied by a process evaluation to examine patient, provider and organizational factors. Outlook: This project will support the translation of guideline recommendations for the identification, prevention and treatment of AUD in routine practice and therefore contributes to the reduction of alcohol-related burden in Germany. The project is running since October 2017 and will provide its main outcomes by end of 2020. Project results will be published in scientific journals and presented at national and international conferences.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Practice Implementation: Case Report of the Evolution of a Quality Improvement Program in a Multicenter Physical Therapy Organization

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 588-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel M. Stevans ◽  
Christopher G. Bise ◽  
John C. McGee ◽  
Debora L. Miller ◽  
Paul Rockar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Implementation Barriers ◽  
Improvement Program ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Systems Perspective

Background and Purpose Our nation's suboptimal health care quality and unsustainable costs can be linked to the failure to implement evidence-based interventions. Implementation is the bridge between the decision to adopt a strategy and its sustained use in practice. The purpose of this case report is threefold: (1) to outline the historical implementation of an evidence-based quality improvement project, (2) to describe the program's future direction using a systems perspective to identify implementation barriers, and (3) to provide implications for the profession as it works toward closing the evidence-to-practice gap. Case Description The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Centers for Rehab Services is a large, multicenter physical therapy organization. In 2005, they implemented a Low Back Initiative utilizing evidence-based protocols to guide clinical decision making. Outcomes The initial implementation strategy used a multifaceted approach. Formative evaluations were used repeatedly to identify barriers to implementation. Barriers may exist outside the organization, they can be created internally, they may result from personnel, or they may be a direct function of the research evidence. Since the program launch, 3 distinct improvement cycles have been utilized to address identified implementation barriers. Discussion Implementation is an iterative process requiring evaluation, measurement, and refinement. During this period, behavior change is actualized as clinicians become increasingly proficient and committed to their use of new evidence. Successfully incorporating evidence into routine practice requires a systems perspective to account for the complexity of the clinical setting. The value the profession provides can be enhanced by improving the implementation of evidence-based strategies. Achieving this outcome will require a concerted effort in all areas of the profession. New skills will be needed by leaders, researchers, managers, and clinicians.

Feasibility barriers and effectiveness of specific treatments for early psychosis in routine mental health care

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 2042-2042
Author(s):  
M. Ruggeri
Keyword(s):  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Early Psychosis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Roles And Responsibilities ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
Representative Samples ◽  
Poor Management

IntroductionIssues of organisational structure and commitment, resource development, and clarity of roles and responsibilities must be addressed before proceeding with any attempt to implement evidence based interventions in a specific service.Evidence suggests that the management of most mental disorders and especially of psychoses is frequently suboptimal. This trend might reflect instances of inadequate resource allocation, but might also reflect the effects of stigma, discrimination, and social exclusion that people with psychosis often experience. It might also indicate poor management of available resources or deficiencies in knowledge or practice.AimsMulti-element psychosocial interventions in the first 5 years from psychosis onset have proved to facilitating recovery and reducing long-term disability. However, most studies often do not test efficacy against a control group and have been conducted in non-epidemiologically representative samples. The presentation will be focussed on process of assessment of acceptability and discrepancies between evidence and clinical practice in the treatment of schizophrenia in community care.Methods and ResultsTrials - such as the GET UP Trial (National Coordinator: Mirella Ruggeri) that is part of the Strategic Research Programs of the Italian Government - that are being conducted in the routine practice and that aim to test the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of evidence-based psychosocial interventions will be presented and discussed.ConclusionsVerify the barriers to application and situations when evidence-based interventions practice might be ineffective or inappropriate, understanding their advantages and limitations is a crucial challenge in the area of early psychosis treatment.

scholarly journals Renal recipients’ knowledge and self-efficacy during first year after implementing an evidence based educational intervention as routine care at the transplantation clinic

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Hjorthaug Urstad ◽  
Astrid Klopstad Wahl ◽  
Torbjørn Moum ◽  
Eivind Engebretsen ◽  
Marit Helen Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Educational Intervention ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Longitudinal Design ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
First Year ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Post Transplantation ◽  
Post Transplant

Abstract Background Following an implementation plan based on dynamic dialogue between researchers and clinicians, this study implemented an evidence-based patient education program (tested in an RCT) into routine care at a clinical transplant center. The aim of this study was to investigate renal recipients’ knowledge and self-efficacy during first year the after the intervention was provided in an everyday life setting. Methods The study has a longitudinal design. The sample consisted of 196 renal recipients. Measurement points were 5 days (baseline), 2 months (T1), 6 months (T2), and one-year post transplantation (T3). Outcome measures were post-transplant knowledge, self-efficacy, and self-perceived general health. Results No statistically significant changes were found from baseline to T1, T2, and T3. Participants’ levels of knowledge and self-efficacy were high prior to the education program and did not change throughout the first year post transplantation. Conclusion Renal recipients self-efficacy and insight in post-transplant aspects seem to be more robust when admitted to the hospital for transplantation compared to baseline observations in the RCT study. This may explain why the implemented educational intervention did not lead to the same positive increase in outcome measures as in the RCT. This study supports that replicating clinical interventions in real-life settings may provide different results compared to results from RCT’s. In order to gain a complete picture of the impacts of an implemented intervention, it is vital also to evaluate results after implementing findings from RCT-studies into everyday practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document