When prioritizing clinical questions in the development of the clinical practice guidelines, clinical questions with high recognition and low variability, or high score and less disagreement among experts were often prioritized, while questions with high recognition but high variability were excluded. By this approach, clinical questions with practical value but also showed high variability due to different causes were not accepted as priorities. There were some methodological and clinical limitations by doing so. By summarizing the causes and connotations of expert opinion variability in terms of clinical experience, expertise and values, this paper analyzed the advantages of the variability quantification application, and proposed corresponding methodological recommendations, so as to provide references for guideline developers in the priority selection of clinical questions.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with high prevalence rate, mortality, and disability rate, and heavy burden caused by the disease, has become a major chronic disease seriously threatening public health worldwide. Chinese medicine and Western medicine both have advantages in diagnosing and treating COPD, which have been widely used in clinic. In order to improve the diagnostic and treatment level for COPD with integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine, Chinese Medicine of internal Medicine Committee of World federation of Chinese Medicine Societies organized and established a multidisciplinary background working group, the document was formulated by referring to the formulating method and process of international guidelines in clinical practice, current evidence with the best quality, and characteristics of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine in treating COPD and weighing pros and cons of interventions, 13 recommendations were established, physicians can refer to this guideline to formulate individualized treatment plans in combination with the specific conditions of patients.
Objective To summarize the online practice teaching experience in laboratory medicine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, and explore a new practice teaching mode of laboratory medicine which can provide a reference for improving the efficiency and quality of laboratory medicine education. Methods From June 8th, 2020 to June 30th, 2020, an online questionnaire survey was conducted in teachers and students who participated in online internship teaching and learning during the COVID-19 epidemic to evaluate the effect of online internship teaching and compare the advantages and disadvantages of online and offline internships. ResultsA total of 65 valid questionnaires were collected from 35 students and 30 teachers. There was no statistically significant difference in the satisfaction scores of intern students between online and offline internships [median (minimum, maximum): 100 (80, 100) vs. 100 (80, 100), P>0.05]. Among the teachers surveyed, 90.0% thought that the pre-teaching preparation for online internship teaching was more complicated and time-consuming, 60.0% thought that the online teaching was more difficult, and 63.3% thought that online internship could not achieve the expected results. Both the teachers and students believed that online and offline internships had their own advantages and disadvantages, and they could learn from each other. Conclusions The present online practice model cannot replace the traditional offline practice. A diversified practice model combining online and offline can help further develop and improve medical laboratory practice teaching.
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.
World Federation of Acupuncture-Moxibustion Societies (WFAS) standard Norms for Formulation and Evaluation of the Clinical Practice Guidelines of Acupuncture and Moxibustion (Hereinafter referred to as Norms) is the first methodological specification for the development of guidelines of acupuncture and moxibustion (Acup-Mox) issued by an international academic organization. The Norms stipulates the principles, procedures, review process and requirements of the development of WFAS guidelines of Acup-Mox. It also proposes the development method, evaluation method, and reporting standards of WFAS guidelines of Acup-Mox. This article introduces the development process of the Norms and provides an interpretation of the methodological supplementary requirements for key links such as "formulation of clinical questions", "evidence retrieval, evaluation and synthesis", and "consensus decision-making", as well as the "framework and contents of recommendation" to provide relevant references for users in learning and using the Guidelines.
Rapid, living evidence-based points, as a new model promoting the rapid translation of evidence, aim to integrate the current best evidence, clinical status, public/patient preferences and values, and provide concise and practical guidance rapidly to important questions concerned in clinical medicine and public health. This paper introduces the methodological framework for the development of "Rapid, Living Evidence-Based Points" from 4 aspects: initiation and planning, evidence search and review, development, update, publication and dissemination of evidence-based points, in order to provide a reference for domestic scholars in developing rapid, living evidence-based points.
The protocol of rational use of oral H1 receptor antagonists in children: a clinical practice guideline primarily introduces key methods, processes and precautions of the guideline to standardize and guarantee the formulation of this evidence-based guideline. Referring to the World Health Organization Guidelines Development Manual, the guideline will be conducted according to the following steps, which involves the establishment of project group; registration (IPGRP-2020CN110); declaration of interest and funding support; identification of the clinical issues and outcomes; evidence retrieval, assessment, synthesis and utilization; investigation of patients’ preferences and values; development, external review and revision of recommendations; guideline release, dissemination and update.
Objective To review main obstacles to health care professionals' adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) by employing the scoping review method and a determinants framework, and to explore the effect of implementation strategies in intervention researches on guideline adherence. Methods The articles published from January 1, 2011 to June 10, 2023 were retrieved from the PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases. The original literature on the CPGs implementation obstacles and strategies was included, and the primary and secondary screening of the literature were completed by four researchers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The basic characteristics of the literature, the factors affecting the implementation of the CPGs, and the strategies used were extracted. The results were analyzed and summarized using qualitative and quantitative methods. Results A total of 61 articles were included in the scoping review. The factors affecting the implementation of CPGs could be divided into five categories: guidelines themselves, external factors, internal factors, individual factors, and implementation process. The most common implementation obstacles were insufficient knowledge or skills of professionals regarding guidelines (n=21, 34.4%), insufficient necessity of using guidelines according to doctors (n=17, 27.9%), and unreasonable factors within hospital (n=16, 26.2%). The factors that promoted the implementation of CPGs included guidelines based on high-quality evidence (n=5, 8.2%), good department or hospital culture (n=4, 6.6%), convenient accessibility of guideline knowledge and information (n=4, 6.6%), and doctors’ excellent professional ability (n=4, 6.6%). The overall effectiveness of the guideline implementation strategy was 50%. Clinical decision support system (CDSS) could improve the adherence of CPGs. Guideline education or training was one of the most commonly used methods, but the effect of improving guideline compliance was unstable. Conclusion The primary challenges in implementing guidelines include inadequate professional capacity and demand, suboptimal hospital infrastructure and limited resources. However, the obstacles are not absolute. It is recommended to use implementation strategies to improve the absorption and implementation of guidelines, among which CDSS is an effective measure for promoting guideline adherence.
This paper introduces the development and changes of clinical practice guidelines based on the enlightenment of the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health Care (RIGHT), and provides policy recommendations.