Theme 1 Barriers: concern over CPG content and currency of CPGs
|
CPGs are “Biased” [7] (p. 1459)
|
Some CPG recommendations are biased
|
CPGs lack “applicability to the practice population” [7] (p. 1460)
|
CPG are not always applicable to specific settings or feasible
|
|
CPGs are not always clear
|
CPGs are “not easy to use” [7] (p. 1461)
|
CPGs can be hard to read
|
|
Outdated CPGs, or slow to be updated
|
CPGs are “Oversimplified and cookbook medicine” [7] (p. 1461), 13
|
Some CPGs are perceived to lead to cookbook medicine that oversimplifies treatment decisions
|
CPGs are “Cumbersome and confusing” [7] (p. 1461)
|
Some CPGs are too complicated or complex to follow
|
CPGs are “Impractical and too rigid to apply” [7] (p. 1459), 13
|
Some CPGs are too rigid to apply to practice
|
|
CPGs do not always take into account patient preferences or circumstances
|
CPGs lack “credibility by guideline authors” [7] (p. 1460)
|
Some CPGs were developed by people not engaged with clinical practice
|
|
Concerned that CPGs are intended to cut costs
|
Theme 2 Barriers: concern about the evidence underpinning CPGs
|
|
CPGs underpinned by controversial evidence or a lack of evidence
|
Clinical trial patient populations not reflective of the patients seen routinely by clinicians
|
Contradicting CPGs that provide contradicting or controversial recommendations or advice
|
Clinicians “disagreed with a guideline due to differences in interpretation of the evidence” [7] (p. 1460)
|
Preference for own interpretation of the evidence over the synthesis of evidence in CPGs
|
|
CPGs do not always take into account clinical experience
|
Theme 3 Barriers: clinician uncertainty and negative perceptions towards CPGs
|
Clinicians reported concern about: A “lack of motivation” to change routines and “Inertia of Previous Practice” [7] (p. 1459)
|
Clinical equipoise and practice habits that differ to the CPG recommendations
|
A lack of “outcome expectancy” [7] (p. 1461)
|
A lack of outcome expectation of the CPG recommendations
|
That CPG “benefits were not worth patient risk, discomfort or cost” [7] (p. 1460)
|
Concerns about side effects associated with CPG recommendations
|
|
Experience of patient adverse effects from CPG treatments
|
“A lack of self-efficacy” [7] (p. 1459)
|
Limited medical expertise to implement the CPG recommendation
|
|
A perception that the CPG treatments are not necessarily appropriate for specific patients
|
A “lack of familiarity” and “awareness” of CPG [7] (p. 1459) 13
|
A lack of awareness of CPGs
|
“Reduced autonomy” [7] (p. 1460) [13], would decrease flexibility [7]
|
CPGs challenged clinician authority or autonomy
|
Some CPGs limit the application of clinical judgment
|
A “lack of agreement” with the CPG [7] (p. 1460)
|
Clinicians disagreeing with specific CPG recommendations
|
|
Limited experience with CPG recommended treatments
|
CPGs “will increased litigation or disciplinary action” [13] (p. 504)
|
Concerned that CPGs will expose them to litigation issues
|
Theme 4 Barriers: organizational and patient factors
|
|
Limited access to treatment services
|
Treatment referral processes that are slow
|
Referral processes that are unreliable
|
Referral processes that are complex
|
Surgeons’ hesitancy to refer patients to other clinicians
|
A lack of support from organizational and clinical leadership
|
CPG recommendations are not always cost effective
|
Clinicians reported barriers to adherence including “Patient factors” or characteristics [7] (p. 1459) [11], which may include factors like Patient preferences regarding treatment, Patient comorbidities and tumor specific characteristics [11]
|
Patient preferences regarding treatment choice
|
Patient comorbidities and tumor specific characteristics
|
|
The level of family support available to patients, and access to transport influences the treatment provided
|
Family perceptions of or experiences of treatments were found to influence patient attitudes
|
The age of the patient
|
Concerns that costs of treatments or concern that adhering to CPG will increase healthcare costs, and other external barriers
|
Poor accessibility to CPGs
|
Theme 5 Facilitators: CPG accessibility and ease of use
|
|
Having highly skilled clinicians with adequate expertise to implement the CPG is important
|
CPGs should be thought of as guides
|
CPGs that are evidence based are more likely to be adhered to [11]
|
Some CPGs are considered good summaries of up-to-date evidence
|
Easy to use CPGs were more likely to be followed, if they don’t require specialized resources and can be easily trialed [11]
|
Some CPGs are considered easy to understand
|
|
Some CPGs are considered flexible
|
Some CPGs are considered implementable
|
User-friendly formats were considered a strength of CPGs
|
Some CPGs are developed in a timely manner
|
CPGs should be updated regularly
|
Adapting and revising CPGs to cater for local needs, and holding meetings about the revised CPG is an important factor
|
Access to and availability of IT technology that integrates CPGs into the software used to record and order treatments, and provides feedback to clinicians is important
|
Theme 6 Facilitators: endorsement and dissemination of CPGs along with adequate resources
|
|
Clinician and clinical organizational support are important
|
Collaboration between clinical disciplines in Multi-Disciplinary Teams (MDTs) is important
|
Easy access to treatment services for patients is important
|
CPG dissemination via medical college programs is important
|
CPG endorsement by government research organizations is important
|
CPG endorsement by medical colleges is important
|
Recommendations by respected peers, or discussions with respected peers is important
|
Symposia about CPGs are important
|
Provision of emails or websites that summarized updated CPGs, or current clinical trials underpinning CPGs are important
|
Access to treatment facilities and adequate resources to implement CPGs is important
|
Audits and feedback are important
|
Multidisciplinary clinical care pathways or MDT discussions increase awareness of CPGs
|
Theme 7 Facilitators: awareness of CPGs and belief in their relevance
|
|
High clinician awareness of CPGs
|
Agreement with and support for CPG recommendations
|
Confidence in CPGs was high when the guidelines were considered high quality
|
Use of or compliance with CPGs was generally reported to be high
|
CPGs should be “developed by credible individuals” and include lists of CPG committee members should be published
|
Financial disincentives for surgeons who do not follow the guidelines
|
Theme 8 Facilitators: CPGs support decision making, improve patient care, reduce clinical variation and reduce costs
|
CPGs were considered to be “helpful sources of advice” and information [13] (p. 504)
|
CPS are good, convenient sources of advice or information with unambiguous recommendations
|
CPGs were considered to be “good educational tools” for making treatment decisions [13] (p. 504)
|
CPS are considered to be good, useful and educational tools for making treatment decisions that help clinicians orientate treatment decisions
|
|
CPGs help decision making during treatment complications, to double check treatment decisions, especially when clinicians don’t do not have access to MDTs
|
CPGs reduced practice variation and increased the uniformity of care across disciplines
|
CPGs help clinicians and patients to reach agreement
|
CPGs increased the confidence of clinicians
|
Support clinicians’ legal defense when they are adhered to
|
CPG recommendations are balanced in terms of harms and benefits
|
CPGs are clinically useful
|
A “multidisciplinary focus” is important in CPGs
|
Not being prescriptive is considered a strength of CPGs
|
CPGs are part of routine practice
|
CPGs improve patient wellbeing
|
CPGs improve patient survival, outcomes and quality of care
|
CPGs were “intended to improve the quality of care” [13] (p. 504)
|
CPGs are intended to enhance the quality of patient care
|
CPGs were “intended to cut health care costs” [13] (p. 504)
|
CPGs are intended to minimize healthcare costs
|