ZOU Kun 1,2,3,4 , HE Siyi 1,2,3,4,5 , YANG Nan 1,2,3,4,5 , ZENG Linan 1,2,3,4 , LI Hailong 1,2,3,4 , HUANG Liang 1,2,3,4 , YI Qiusha 1,2,3,4 , ZHANG Mingyue 6 , WANG Qiang 7 , ZHANG Lingli 1,2,3,4,8
  • 1. Department of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
  • 2. Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
  • 3. NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research on Drug Products in vitro and in vivo Correlation, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
  • 4. Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
  • 5. West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
  • 6. School of Stomatology, Chinese Medical University, Shenyang 110002, P. R. China;
  • 7. Medical Management Service Guidance Center, National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing 100044, P. R. China;
  • 8. Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
WANG Qiang, Email: jason2019@sina.cn; ZHANG Lingli, Email: zhanglingli@scu.edu.cn
Clinical practice guideline; Implementation effect; Evaluation tools; Systematic review
10.7507/1672-2531.202308060
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables References Cited by

Objective To summarize the evaluation tools for the implementation effect of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), to inform and support the evidence-based development of a general tool for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs. Methods Seven biomedical literature databases, including PubMed, EMbase and CNKI, and two academic websites, were searched from establishment to June 2022. Theoretical and empirical research on the evaluation tools of the implementation effect of CPGs were included. Two researchers independently screened literature and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Based on the Implementation Science RE-AIM theoretical framework, an evaluation framework and a list of alternative items of the implementation effect of the CPGs were initially drawn up by thematic synthesis methods. Results A total of 208 articles were included, and 8 mature evaluation tools related to the implementation effect of guidelines were selected. Current research on the evaluation of the implementation effect of CPGs mainly focused on single diseases, with concern of the cognition, attitude and compliance of users to CPGs, and the process of the implementation of CPGs and factors affecting the implementation effect of CPGs. There were limitations such as lack of evaluation on the terminal effect of the implementation of CPGs, rarely use of mature theoretical frameworks, from single evaluation perspectives, and inclusion of limited evaluation dimensions. The initial proposed evaluation framework contains a list of alternative items with 6 primary indicators, 12 secondary indicators and 41 tertiary indicators. Conclusion Currently, there is a lack of a comprehensive, multi-perspective, mature theory based, general tool for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs. The framework and the list of alternative items for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs based on the Implementation Science RE-AIM theory can inform and support the development of a tool for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs.