Determinants of complexity in clinical practice guidelines: a Delphi study including perspectives from guideline developers and implementers.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Jbi Evidence Implementation Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000499
Marleen Corremans, Zachary Munn, Sanne Peters, Pascale Jonckheer, Heidi Parisod, Gerlinde Lenaerts, Marlène Karam, Nancy Durieux, Anne-Lise Leclercq, Ashley Boers, Herman Vandevijvere
{"title":"Determinants of complexity in clinical practice guidelines: a Delphi study including perspectives from guideline developers and implementers.","authors":"Marleen Corremans, Zachary Munn, Sanne Peters, Pascale Jonckheer, Heidi Parisod, Gerlinde Lenaerts, Marlène Karam, Nancy Durieux, Anne-Lise Leclercq, Ashley Boers, Herman Vandevijvere","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The Medical Research Council proposed a framework to develop and implement complex interventions in practice. How to adopt these interventions is described in recommendations of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Many factors may influence the complexity of a guideline. The aim of this paper is to describe the determinants of complexity in the development and implementation of an evidence-based clinical practice guideline.A working group with 16 participants was established, consisting of a debate team and a Delphi panel. The debate team discussed online to define the key elements of the MRC's definition of a complex intervention to see whether these elements are applicable to guidelines. These elements were presented to the Delphi panel to assess their relevance.After the first round, consensus was reached on eight elements, with the inter-rater reliability varying from 0.83 to 1.00. After the second Delphi round, consensus was reached on two more elements. The consensus stated that these ten elements all define an aspect of the complexity in guidelines. There was no agreement regarding the exclusion of a specific element.Developers and end-users consider that the complexity of a guideline and its implementation is affected when the number of components, settings, targeted behaviors, and stakeholders increase; when a gap exists between the guideline and the reality of clinical practice; or when differences in education are evident between end-users. Moreover, the level of collaboration required of the different end-users, the scope of change, the level of evidence in the guideline, and the workload for end-users also determine complexity.</p><p><strong>Spanish abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A333.</p>","PeriodicalId":48473,"journal":{"name":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000499","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: The Medical Research Council proposed a framework to develop and implement complex interventions in practice. How to adopt these interventions is described in recommendations of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Many factors may influence the complexity of a guideline. The aim of this paper is to describe the determinants of complexity in the development and implementation of an evidence-based clinical practice guideline.A working group with 16 participants was established, consisting of a debate team and a Delphi panel. The debate team discussed online to define the key elements of the MRC's definition of a complex intervention to see whether these elements are applicable to guidelines. These elements were presented to the Delphi panel to assess their relevance.After the first round, consensus was reached on eight elements, with the inter-rater reliability varying from 0.83 to 1.00. After the second Delphi round, consensus was reached on two more elements. The consensus stated that these ten elements all define an aspect of the complexity in guidelines. There was no agreement regarding the exclusion of a specific element.Developers and end-users consider that the complexity of a guideline and its implementation is affected when the number of components, settings, targeted behaviors, and stakeholders increase; when a gap exists between the guideline and the reality of clinical practice; or when differences in education are evident between end-users. Moreover, the level of collaboration required of the different end-users, the scope of change, the level of evidence in the guideline, and the workload for end-users also determine complexity.

Spanish abstract: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A333.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Determinants of complexity in clinical practice guidelines: a Delphi study including perspectives from guideline developers and implementers. Evaluation of a capacity-building program to enhance evidence-based practice of cognitive rehabilitation providers: a pilot study. An integrated, multidisciplinary, early identification, and triage program for university students at risk of anxiety and depression: a best practice implementation project. Nurses' use of the five rights of medication administration in a comprehensive care unit: a best practice implementation project. Assessment, patency, and management of occlusion of central venous catheters in ICU and hemodialysis patients in a Hospital in Badajoz, Spain: a best practice implementation project.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1