Zou Kun, Yang Nan, He Siyi, Zeng Linan, Li Hailong, Huang Liang, Yi Qiusha, Gao Xiangyu, Ren Jiajun, Zhang Mingyue, Wang Qiang, Zhang Lingli
Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy/Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research on Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2025 Jul 21;30(4):250-258. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113308.
To develop a generalised tool to evaluate the success of implementation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).
Systematic review, group brainstorming discussion and modified Delphi method.
A steering group (3 members) was assembled responsible for the guidance and ensuring stakeholder's involvement. A tool development group (24 members) of leading experts provided expertise in refining the frame and items during the development and participated in the Delphi process. And a secretary group (7 members) was responsible for the organization and coordination, systematic reviewing, drafting of the preliminary list of items, documenting and revising the tool according to the suggestions of the development group.
Four process stages were employed. First, the project was launched with core groups formed for the development. Second, based on the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance framework, a systematic review of existing methods for evaluating the success of CPGs implementation and a brainstorming discussion were conducted to form a preliminary list. Third, a modified Delphi method was organised, integrating a multidisciplinary face-to-face consultation meeting with two rounds of online Delphi consultations. Fourth, the tool was revised and finalised incorporating all expert suggestions.
Development teams comprising multidisciplinary experts were formed. In the systematic review, 7 biomedical literature databases were searched, and 208 pieces of literature were included. After three rounds of brainstorming discussions on items identified in the literature, a 23-item preliminary list was produced. In the modified Delphi method, 14 experts made 23 main suggestions in the face-to-face meeting on the list. 13 experts participated in the first round of Delphi consultation, reached agreement on 20 items, removed 4 items and added 1 new item. 11 experts attended the second-round consultation and had an agreement to include 20 items after revision.
The Guideline Implementation Success Assessment Tool (A-GIST) was systematically developed as a comprehensive tool to assess the success of CPGs implementation. It comprises 5 dimensions, Reach, Adoption, Implementation, Effectiveness and Maintenance, encompassing 20 items that integrate perspectives from both clinicians and patients. A-GIST is designed to facilitate evaluating, benchmarking and cross-comparison of implementation success between guidelines, facilities and regions. Additionally, it provides evidence-based insights to inform the development of targeted strategies for optimising guideline implementation practices.
开发一种通用工具,以评估临床实践指南(CPG)实施的成功程度。
系统评价、小组头脑风暴讨论及改良德尔菲法。
组建了一个指导小组(3名成员),负责指导并确保利益相关者的参与。一个由顶尖专家组成的工具开发小组(24名成员)在开发过程中提供完善框架和条目的专业知识,并参与德尔菲法流程。还有一个秘书小组(7名成员)负责组织与协调、系统评价、起草条目初步清单、记录并根据开发小组的建议修订该工具。
采用了四个流程阶段。首先,项目启动,组建核心开发小组。其次,基于“覆盖、效果、采纳、实施、维持”(Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance,RE-AIM)框架,对评估CPG实施成功程度的现有方法进行系统评价,并开展头脑风暴讨论,以形成初步清单。第三,组织改良德尔菲法,将多学科面对面咨询会议与两轮在线德尔菲咨询相结合。第四,纳入所有专家建议对工具进行修订并最终确定。
组建了由多学科专家组成的开发团队。在系统评价中,检索了7个生物医学文献数据库,纳入208篇文献。对文献中确定的条目进行三轮头脑风暴讨论后,生成了一份包含23个条目的初步清单。在改良德尔菲法中,14名专家在面对面会议上对该清单提出了23条主要建议。13名专家参与第一轮德尔菲咨询,就20个条目达成一致,删除4个条目并新增1个条目。11名专家参加第二轮咨询,修订后就纳入20个条目达成一致。
系统开发了指南实施成功评估工具(A-GIST),作为评估CPG实施成功程度的综合工具。它包括“覆盖、采纳、实施、效果、维持”5个维度,涵盖20个条目,整合了临床医生和患者双方的观点。A-GIST旨在促进对不同指南、机构和地区之间实施成功情况的评估、基准设定和交叉比较。此外,它还提供基于证据的见解,为制定优化指南实施实践的针对性策略提供依据。