Grimshaw J M, Thomas R E, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay C R, Vale L, Whitty P, Eccles M P, Matowe L, Shirran L, Wensing M, Dijkstra R, Donaldson C
Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2004 Feb;8(6):iii-iv, 1-72. doi: 10.3310/hta8060.
To undertake a systematic review of the effectiveness and costs of different guideline development, dissemination and implementation strategies. To estimate the resource implications of these strategies. To develop a framework for deciding when it is efficient to develop and introduce clinical guidelines.
MEDLINE, Healthstar, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, EMBASE, SIGLE and the specialised register of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group.
Single estimates of dichotomous process variables were derived for each study comparison based upon the primary end-point or the median measure across several reported end-points. Separate analyses were undertaken for comparisons of different types of intervention. The study also explored whether the effects of multifaceted interventions increased with the number of intervention components. Studies reporting economic data were also critically appraised. A survey to estimate the feasibility and likely resource requirements of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies in UK settings was carried out with key informants from primary and secondary care.
In total, 235 studies reporting 309 comparisons met the inclusion criteria; of these 73% of comparisons evaluated multifaceted interventions, although the maximum number of replications of a specific multifaceted intervention was 11 comparisons. Overall, the majority of comparisons reporting dichotomous process data observed improvements in care; however, there was considerable variation in the observed effects both within and across interventions. Commonly evaluated single interventions were reminders, dissemination of educational materials, and audit and feedback. There were 23 comparisons of multifaceted interventions involving educational outreach. The majority of interventions observed modest to moderate improvements in care. No relationship was found between the number of component interventions and the effects of multifaceted interventions. Only 29.4% of comparisons reported any economic data. The majority of studies only reported costs of treatment; only 25 studies reported data on the costs of guideline development or guideline dissemination and implementation. The majority of studies used process measures for their primary end-point, despite the fact that only three guidelines were explicitly evidence based (and may not have been efficient). Respondents to the key informant survey rarely identified existing budgets to support guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. In general, the respondents thought that only dissemination of educational materials and short (lunchtime) educational meetings were generally feasible within current resources.
There is an imperfect evidence base to support decisions about which guideline dissemination and implementation strategies are likely to be efficient under different circumstances. Decision makers need to use considerable judgement about how best to use the limited resources they have for clinical governance and related activities to maximise population benefits. They need to consider the potential clinical areas for clinical effectiveness activities, the likely benefits and costs required to introduce guidelines and the likely benefits and costs as a result of any changes in provider behaviour. Further research is required to: develop and validate a coherent theoretical framework of health professional and organisational behaviour and behaviour change to inform better the choice of interventions in research and service settings, and to estimate the efficiency of dissemination and implementation strategies in the presence of different barriers and effect modifiers.
对不同指南制定、传播及实施策略的有效性和成本进行系统评价。估计这些策略对资源的影响。建立一个框架,以确定何时制定和引入临床指南是有效的。
MEDLINE、Healthstar、Cochrane对照试验注册库、EMBASE、SIGLE以及Cochrane有效实践与护理组织(EPOC)小组的专门注册库。
基于主要终点或多个报告终点的中位数指标,为每项研究比较得出二分法过程变量的单一估计值。对不同类型干预措施的比较进行单独分析。该研究还探讨了多方面干预措施的效果是否会随着干预组成部分数量的增加而增强。对报告经济数据的研究也进行了严格评估。对英国基层和二级医疗的关键信息提供者进行了一项调查,以估计指南传播和实施策略在英国环境下的可行性和可能的资源需求。
共有235项报告了309项比较的研究符合纳入标准;其中73%的比较评估了多方面干预措施,尽管特定多方面干预措施的最大重复次数为11项比较。总体而言,大多数报告二分法过程数据的比较观察到护理方面有所改善;然而,在干预措施内部和之间观察到的效果存在相当大的差异。常见的单一干预措施评估包括提醒、教育材料的传播以及审核与反馈。有23项涉及教育外展的多方面干预措施的比较。大多数干预措施观察到护理方面有适度到中度的改善。未发现组成干预措施的数量与多方面干预措施的效果之间存在关联。只有29.4%的比较报告了任何经济数据。大多数研究仅报告了治疗成本;只有25项研究报告了指南制定或指南传播与实施成本的数据。尽管只有三项指南明确基于证据(且可能并不有效),但大多数研究在其主要终点使用了过程指标。关键信息提供者调查的受访者很少能确定现有预算来支持指南传播和实施策略。总体而言,受访者认为在当前资源范围内,只有教育材料的传播和简短(午餐时间)的教育会议通常是可行的。
支持关于在不同情况下哪些指南传播和实施策略可能有效的决策的证据基础并不完善。决策者需要对如何最好地利用他们有限的资源进行临床治理和相关活动以最大化人群利益运用相当多的判断力。他们需要考虑临床有效性活动的潜在临床领域、引入指南所需的可能收益和成本以及提供者行为任何变化所导致的可能收益和成本。需要进一步研究:建立并验证一个关于卫生专业人员和组织行为及行为改变的连贯理论框架,以便更好地为研究和服务环境中的干预选择提供信息,并估计在存在不同障碍和效应修饰因素的情况下传播和实施策略的效率。