Faculty Opinions recommendation of Uterine-preserving surgeries for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines.

Introduction: Clinical decision support (CDS) has been implemented in many clinical settings in order to improve decision-making. Their potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce unnecessary testing is well documented; however, their effectiveness in impacting physician practice in real world implementations has been limited by poor physician adherence. The objective of this systematic review and meta-regression was to establish the effectiveness of CDS tools on adherence and identify which characteristics of CDS tools increase physician use of and adherence. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to June 2017. Included studies examined CDS in a hospital setting, reported on physician adherence to or use of CDS, utilized a comparative study design, and reported primary data. All tool type was classified based on the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) classifications. Studies were stratified based on study design (RCT vs. observational). Meta-regression was completed to assess the different effect of characteristics of the tool (e.g. whether the tool was mandatory or voluntary, EPOC classifications). Results: A total of 3,359 candidate articles were identified. Seventy-two met inclusion criteria, of which 46 reported outcomes appropriate for meta-regression (5 RCTs and 41 observational studies). Overall, a trend of increased CDS use was found (pooled RCT OR: 1.36 [95% CI: 0.97-1.89]; pooled observational OR: 2.12 [95% CI: 1.75-2.56]).When type of tool is considered, clinical practice guidelines were superior compared to other interventions (p=.150). Reminders (p=.473) and educational interventions (p=.489) were less successful than other interventions. Multi-modal tools were not more successful that single interventions (p=.810). Lastly, voluntary tools may be supperior to than mandatory tools (p=.148). None of these results are statistically significant. Conclusion: CDS tools accompanied by a planned intervention increases physician utilization and adherence to the tool. Meta-regression found that clinical practice guidelines had the biggest impact on physician adherence although not statistically significant. Further research is required to understand the most effective intervention to maximize physician utilization of CDS tools.

Download Full-text

Adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of cancers in Australia and the factors associated with adherence: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050912 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (9) ◽

pp. e050912

Author(s):

Mia Bierbaum ◽

Frances Rapport ◽

Gaston Arnolda ◽

Yvonne Tran ◽

Bróna Nic Giolla Easpaig ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Practice ◽

Cancer Treatment ◽

Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽

Practice Guidelines ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Implementation Strategies ◽

Factors Associated

IntroductionClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) synthesise the latest evidence to support clinical and patient decision-making. CPG adherent care is associated with improved patient survival outcomes; however, adherence rates are low across some cancer streams in Australia. Greater understanding of specific barriers to cancer treatment CPG adherence is warranted to inform future implementation strategies.This paper presents the protocol for a systematic review that aims to determine cancer treatment CPG adherence rates in Australia across a variety of common cancers, and to identify any factors associated with adherence to those CPGs, as well as any associations between CPG adherence and patient outcomes.Methods and analysisFive databases will be searched, Ovid Medline, PsychInfo, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science, for eligible studies evaluating adherence rates to cancer treatment CPGs in Australia. A team of reviewers will screen the abstracts in pairs according to predetermined inclusion criteria and then review the full text of eligible studies. All included studies will be assessed for quality and risk of bias. Data will be extracted using a predefined data extraction template. The frequency or rate of adherence to CPGs, factors associated with adherence to those CPGs and any reported patient outcome rates (eg, relative risk ratios or 5-year survival rates) associated with adherence to CPGs will be described. If applicable, a pooled estimate of the rate of adherence will be calculated by conducting a random-effects meta-analysis. The systematic review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval will not be required, as this review will present anonymised data from other published studies. Results from this study will form part of a doctoral dissertation (MB), will be published in a journal, presented at conferences, and other academic presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020222962.

Download Full-text

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of atraumatic shoulder conditions: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048297 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. e048297

Author(s):

Dana Yen Lin Lee ◽

Romi Haas ◽

Jason A Wallis ◽

Denise A O’Connor ◽

Rachelle Buchbinder

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Practice ◽

Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽

Practice Guidelines ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Adhesive Capsulitis ◽

Agree Ii ◽

Optimal Care ◽

Professional Societies ◽

Ethical Approval

IntroductionShoulder conditions are a major cause of morbidity in the general population. Many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for shoulder conditions have been developed. Their purpose is to provide evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in providing optimal care to maximise patient outcomes. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise, and compare the content and quality of CPGs for atraumatic shoulder conditions.Methods and analysisCPGs for atraumatic shoulder conditions will be included provided they make recommendations about diagnosis and/or management, are identified by their authors as a guideline and are consistent with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II definition of a guideline. A systematic search of electronic databases, online guideline repositories and the websites of relevant professional societies will be conducted to identify eligible CPGs. Search terms relating to shoulder conditions (eg, ‘adhesive capsulitis’, ‘rotator cuff’ and ‘bursitis’) will be combined with a validated search filter for CPGs. Pairs of independent reviewers will determine eligibility of CPGs identified by the search. Quality appraisal of included CPGs will be performed using the AGREE II instrument. Recommendations from each CPG and how they were determined will be extracted and compared across similar CPGs. Results from this systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this systematic review. The results from this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated to professional societies that publish shoulder CPGs, clinical policy groups, clinicians, researchers and consumers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020182723.

Download Full-text