Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Addressing implementation challenges during guideline development – a case study of Swedish national guidelines for methods of preventing disease

Authors: Linda Richter-Sundberg, Therese Kardakis, Lars Weinehall, Rickard Garvare, Monica E Nyström

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Many of the world’s life threatening diseases (e.g. cancer, heart disease, stroke) could be prevented by eliminating life-style habits such as tobacco use, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and excessive alcohol use. Incorporating evidence-based research on methods to change unhealthy lifestyle habits in clinical practice would be equally valuable. However gaps between guideline development and implementation are well documented, with implications for health care quality, safety and effectiveness. The development phase of guidelines has been shown to be important both for the quality in guideline content and for the success of implementation. There are, however, indications that guidelines related to general disease prevention methods encounter specific barriers compared to guidelines that are diagnosis-specific. In 2011 the Swedish National board for Health and Welfare launched guidelines with a preventive scope. The aim of this study was to investigate how implementation challenges were addressed during the development process of these disease preventive guidelines.

Methods

Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the guideline development management group. Archival data detailing the guideline development process were also collected and used in the analysis. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis as the analytical framework.

Results

The study identified several strategies and approaches that were used to address implementation challenges during guideline development. Four themes emerged from the analysis: broad agreements and consensus about scope and purpose; a formalized and structured development procedure; systematic and active involvement of stakeholders; and openness and transparency in the specific guideline development procedure. Additional factors concerning the scope of prevention and the work environment of guideline developers were perceived to influence the possibilities to address implementation issues.

Conclusions

This case study provides examples of how guideline developers perceive and approach the issue of implementation during the development and early launch of prevention guidelines. Models for guideline development could benefit from an initial assessment of how the guideline topic, its target context and stakeholders will affect the upcoming implementation.
Literature
1.
2.
Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8:6.CrossRef
3.
Gagliardi AM, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM. How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implement Sci. 2011;6:26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein E, Marcus AC. Why don’t we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the Efficacy-to-Effectiveness Transition. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:1261–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
IOM Institute of Medicine. Guidelines we can trust. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2011.
6.
7.
Turner T, Misso M, Harris C, Green S. Development of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs): comparing approaches. Implement Sci. 2008;3:45.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Fischer AJ, Threlfall A, Meah S, Cookson H, Rutter H, Kelly MP. The appraisal of public health interventions: an overview. J Public Health. 2013;35:488–94.CrossRef
9.
Eccles MP, Grimshaw JM, Shekelle P, Schünemann HJ, Woolf S. Developing clinical practice guidelines: target audiences, identifying topics for guidelines, guideline group composition and functioning and conflicts of interest. Implement Sci. 2012;7:60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Knai C, Brusamento S, Legido-Quigley H, Saliba V, Panteli D, Turk E, et al. Systematic review of the methodological quality of clinical guideline development for the management of chronic disease in Europe. Health Policy. 2012;107:157–67.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M, Davis D. Improving Patient Care: The Implementation of Change in Health Care. 2nd ed. Chicester: Wiley; 2013.CrossRef
12.
13.
Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Solà I, Gich I, Delgado-Noguera M, Rigau D, et al. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:e58.PubMed
14.
Sachs M. Successful strategies and methods of nursing standards implementation. Pflege. 2006;19:33–44.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4:22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Oxman AD, Schuneman HJ, Fretheim A. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 2 Priority setting. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4:14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Van der Wees PJ, Hendriks EJM, Custers JWH, Burgers JS, Dekker J, de Bie RA. Comparison of international guideline programs to evaluate and update the Dutch program for clinical guideline development in physical therapy. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:191.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Kerwin AJ, Haut ER, Burns JB, Como JJ, Haider A, Stassen N, et al. The Eastern Association of the Surgery of Trauma approach to practice management guideline development using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(4):283–7.CrossRef
19.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
AGREE The Collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice. guidelines: the AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12:18–23.CrossRef
21.
Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P. Guidelines International Network: toward International Standards for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(7):525–31.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010;182(18):E839–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement. CMAJ. 2010;13(182):1045–52.CrossRef
24.
Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abbound P-A, et al. Why Don’t Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines? A Framework for Improvement. JAMA. 1999;282:1458–65.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Seddon ME, Marshall MN, Campbell SM, Roland MO. Systematic review of studies of quality of clinical care in general practice in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Qual Health Care. 2001;10:152–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJE, Mistiaen P. Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008;8:38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Rashidian A, Eccles MP, Russell I. Falling on stony ground? A qualitative study of implementation of clinical guidelines prescribing recommendations in primary care. Health Policy. 2008;85:148–61.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Grilli R, Lomas J. Evaluating the message: the relationship between compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline. Med Care. 1994;32:202–13.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Rogers EM. Lessons for guidelines from the diffusion of innovations. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1995;21:324–8.PubMed
30.
Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82:581–629.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Brusamento S, Legido-Quigley H, Panteli D, Turk E, Knai C, Saliba V, et al. Assessing the effectiveness of strategies to implement clincial guidelines for the management of chronic diseases at primary care level in EU Members States: A systematic review. Health Policy. 2012;107:168–83.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Fie S, Norman IJ, While AE. The relationship between physicians’ and nurses’ personal physical activity habits and their health-promotion practice: a systematic review. Health Educ J. 2013;72:102–9.CrossRef
33.
Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. MJA. 2004;180 Suppl 6:57–60.
34.
Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. The periodic health examination. Can Med Assoc J. 1979;121:1193–254.
35.
Woolf SH, Atkins D. The evolving role of prevention in health care contributions of the U.S. preventive services task force. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20:13–20.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Kelly MP, Stewart E, Morgan A, Killoran A, Fischer A, Threlfall A, et al. A conceptual framework for public health: NICE’s emerging approach. Public Health. 2009;123:e14–20.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Politi MC, Wolin KY, Légaré F. Implementing Clinical Practice Guidelines About Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Through Shared Decision Making. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:838–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Brobeck E, Odencrants S, Bergh H, Hildingh C. Health promotion practice and its implementation in Swedish health care. Int Nurs Rev. 2013;60:374–80.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Geense WW, van de Glind IM, LS Visscher T, van Achterberg T. Barriers, facilitators and attitudes influencing health promotion activities in general practice: an explorative pilot study. BMC Fam Pract. 2013;14:20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Kelly M, Morgan A, Ellis S, Younger T, Huntley J, Swann C. Evidence based public health: A review of the experience of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of developing public health guidance in England. Soc Sci Med. 2010;71:1056–62.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Swann C, Naidoo B, Kelly MP. A nudge in the right direction: developing guidance on changing behaviour. In: Shemilt I, editor. Evidence based public health: Effectiveness and efficiency. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009. p. 353–67.CrossRef
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24:105–12.CrossRefPubMed
49.
50.
51.
Grol R. Improving the Quality of Medical Care. J Am Med Assoc. 2001;286(20):2578–85.CrossRef
52.
Ollenschläger G, Marshall C, Qureshi S, Rosenbrand K, Burgers J, Mäkelä M, et al. Improving the quality of health care: using international collaboration to inform guideline programmes by founding the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13:455–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
53.
Boivin A, Currie K, Fervers B, Gracia J, James M, Marshall C, et al. Patient and public involvement in clinical guidelines: international experiences and future perspectives. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:1–4.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Addressing implementation challenges during guideline development – a case study of Swedish national guidelines for methods of preventing disease
Authors
Linda Richter-Sundberg
Therese Kardakis
Lars Weinehall
Rickard Garvare
Monica E Nyström
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0672-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Health Services Research 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

A concise, health service coverage index for monitoring progress towards universal health coverage

Research article

Experiences of Latinos with limited English proficiency with patient registration systems and their interactions with clinic front office staff: an exploratory study to inform community-based translational research in North Carolina

Research article

The economic burden of overseas medical treatment: a cross sectional study of Maldivian medical travelers

Research article

Evaluation of the HIV lay counselling and testing profession in South Africa

Research article

Health and use of health services of people who are homeless and at risk of homelessness who receive free primary health care in Dublin

Research article

Factors determining the patients’ care intensity for surgeons and surgical nurses: a conjoint analysis