TY - JOUR
T1 - Developing tools to enhance the use of systematic reviews for clinical care in health systems
AU - Morrow, Allison S.
AU - Whiteside, Stephen P.
AU - Sim, Leslie A.
AU - Brito, Juan P.
AU - Wang, Zhen
AU - Murad, Mohammad H.
N1 - Funding Information:
This manuscript is based on research conducted by the Mayo Clinic Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. HHSA290201500013I HHSA29032001T).
Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018.
PY - 2018/12/1
Y1 - 2018/12/1
N2 - We aimed to develop tools that can facilitate uptake of evidence summarised in systematic reviews by clinical decision makers in health systems. After conducting a systematic review on the management of anxiety in children, we interviewed health system representatives, clinicians and patients to ask about additional information needed for decision-making. Using stakeholders' feedback and literature searches for contextual and implementation information, we developed two tools (decision aids (DAs)), one for the health system and the second for the clinical encounter. This information mapped to factors of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision Framework. The health system DAs provided information on which patients are candidate for treatment, values and preferences, costs and resources, acceptability, impact on health equity, feasibility, drug dosing, alternative therapies, remission rates and prognosis. Health system stakeholders found the DA useful for clinical decision-making and generalisable to other conditions. The encounter DA was produced as cards containing information on issues that drive treatment decisions (effect on symptoms, effect on function, treatment burden, side effects and cost). Patients and parents prioritised the cards and chose the order in which these issues were discussed with clinician. The encounter DA was found to be helpful by patients, parents and clinicians. We conclude that the uptake of evidence summaries by health systems can be enhanced by developing tools that provide contextual and implementation information about clinical care. A dual approach addressing health system stakeholders as well as clinicians and patients is likely feasible and helpful.
AB - We aimed to develop tools that can facilitate uptake of evidence summarised in systematic reviews by clinical decision makers in health systems. After conducting a systematic review on the management of anxiety in children, we interviewed health system representatives, clinicians and patients to ask about additional information needed for decision-making. Using stakeholders' feedback and literature searches for contextual and implementation information, we developed two tools (decision aids (DAs)), one for the health system and the second for the clinical encounter. This information mapped to factors of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision Framework. The health system DAs provided information on which patients are candidate for treatment, values and preferences, costs and resources, acceptability, impact on health equity, feasibility, drug dosing, alternative therapies, remission rates and prognosis. Health system stakeholders found the DA useful for clinical decision-making and generalisable to other conditions. The encounter DA was produced as cards containing information on issues that drive treatment decisions (effect on symptoms, effect on function, treatment burden, side effects and cost). Patients and parents prioritised the cards and chose the order in which these issues were discussed with clinician. The encounter DA was found to be helpful by patients, parents and clinicians. We conclude that the uptake of evidence summaries by health systems can be enhanced by developing tools that provide contextual and implementation information about clinical care. A dual approach addressing health system stakeholders as well as clinicians and patients is likely feasible and helpful.
KW - epidemiology
KW - health policy
KW - quality in health care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056938148&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056938148&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110995
DO - 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110995
M3 - Review article
C2 - 30194075
AN - SCOPUS:85056938148
SN - 2515-446X
VL - 23
SP - 206
EP - 209
JO - BMJ evidence-based medicine
JF - BMJ evidence-based medicine
IS - 6
ER -