Guideline implementation with decision support checklist (GUIDES) aims to assist the self-reflection of evidence-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) related professionals to enhance the process monitor and continuous improvement of evidence-based CDSS. This paper interpreted the development process, target user, and assessment method of GUIDES, analyzed the practical value of GUIDES through a typical example, and then reflected on the GUIDES and current studies on evidence-based CDSS in China. It is expected to provide references for future studies.
Based on the national 2020 and 2022 versions of Accreditation Standards for Tertiary Hospital, the Hospitals Accreditation Office of the Sichuan Provincial Health Commission organized to develop Implementation Rules for the Accreditation Standards for Tertiary Comprehensive Hospitals in Sichuan Province (2023 Edition). In order to guide the evaluated hospitals to comprehensively understand and master the content of hospital infection prevention and control (IPC), this article interprets the main evaluation points and scoring methods of hospital infection management in the detailed rules, emphasizes on organizational management, system implementation, monitoring/supervision, and connotation improvement for IPC. The purpose is to make the evaluated hospitals attach importance to the standardized implementation of daily work of IPC, focus on the routine, objective, and quantitative approach to accreditation work, and continuously achieve the effect of quality improvement in IPC.
Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi), in conjunction with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR), initiated a joint Task Force and published guideline and a checklist for deliberative processes for health technology assessment (HTA). Currently, there is a lack of guidance for designing and implementing deliberative processes of HTA in China, so this paper performs a detailed interpretation of the guideline and checklist, with a view to providing a reference for China's HTA and deliberative process, in order to promote the dissemination and application of the HTA methodology, and advance the construction of domestic HTA deliberative processes capacity and institutional mechanism.
The number of investigator initiated research (IIR) is increasing. But the recognition and management of IIR in China is still in its infancy, and there is a lack of specific and operable guidance for the implementation process. Based on our practical experiences, previous literature reports, and current policy regulations, the authors took prospective IIR as an example to summarize the implementation process of IIR into 14 steps, which are as the following: study initiation, ethical review, study registration, study filing, case report form design, database establishment, standard operating procedure making, investigator training, informed consent, data collection, data entry, data verification, data locking and data archiving.
Currently, there is a lack of clarity and standardization regarding the implementation details of interventions in traditional Chinese medicine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). This in methodological guidance for standardizing the implementation prescription adversely impacts the quality of implementation and hinders the clinical application rate of recommendations. Through in-depth analysis of implementation prescription of evidence-based CPGs in traditional Chinese medicine, we identified the challenges associated with standardization. In response, we propose enhancing the technical specifications of implementation prescriptions, advocating for improved formulation processes, diverse reporting approaches, and standardizedological guidelines. These recommendations aim to serve as a methodological reference and guidance for clinical practice guideline developers.
To standardize and improve the reporting quality of implementation studies, BMJ published the standards for reporting implementation studies (StaRI). This paper introduces the background and process of StaRI development, and interprets the core content of StaRI. It is expected that StaRI will provide support for domestic researchers to carry out implementation studies and writing implementation research reports.
Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs can test the effectiveness of interventions and the outcomes of implementation strategies concurrently and accelerate the transformation of research results into routine practice. This paper introduced three types of effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs and corresponding reporting guidelines, including standards for reporting implementation studies, cluster randomized design and CONSORT 2010, stepped-wedge cluster randomized design and extended version CONSORT 2018, qualitative research and COREQ reporting guideline, and provide references for domestic researchers to produce research reports on effectiveness-implementation hybrid design.
Implementation science is a relatively emergent and growing research area. Implementation research can assist to transform what is possible in theory to reality in practice and address the challenge of implementing proven interventions in the real world. Implementation research has a wide range of usages and complex research problems, so appropriate research methods, designs, and outcomes variables are required to address different research objectives. To better conduct implementation research, this paper systematically introduces the research designs, outcome variables, and reporting guideline of the implementation research in health care, based on the purposes and research questions of implementation research.
Objective The ultimate goal of developing guidelines is for using them in clinical practice. In this study, an implementation evaluation tool was developed to promote the overall evaluation of guidelines and to improve their promotion and implementation. Methods The research group set up a team to formulate and establish a guideline implementation evaluation tool, through preliminary research, interviews, a systematic review of relevant literature, two expert consensus meetings and two Delphi expert consensus meetings to evaluate the guideline implementation tool. Experts were invited to give opinions and grades on the fields, items and overall implementation evaluation method of the tool. Results The evaluation tool for the implementation of guidelines included 5 fields, accessibility, communicability, performability, recognizability and applicability, with a total of 7 items. The scale-level CVIs in two rounds of Delphi expert consensus were 0.91 and 0.93. We collected opinions and suggestions and made some revisions and insertions without deleting any items based on the parameter that no items fulfilled the standard if mean <3.5, coefficient of variation >15% and I-CVI<0.78. Conclusion In this study, in order to provide a standard and method for the evaluation of guideline implementation, a guideline implementation evaluation tool has been developed and evaluated by clinically-related physicians and guideline formulation methodology experts. The guideline implementation evaluation tool presents satisfactory face and content validity. Empirical research is needed to verify the tool’s performance in evaluating guideline implementation.