Dataset Information

Improving treatment of depression in primary health care: a case study of obstacles to perform a clinical trial designed to implement practice guidelines.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to investigate factors contributing to the failure of a randomized clinical trial designed to implement and test clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression in primary health care (PHC).Although the occurrence of depression is increasing globally, many patients with depression do not receive optimal treatment. Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression, which aim to establish evidence-based clinical practice in health care, are often underused and in need of operationalization in and adaptation to clinical praxis. This study explores a failed clinical trial designed to implement and test treatment of depression in PHC in Sweden.Qualitative case study methodology was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight participants from the clinical trial researcher group and 11 health care professionals at five PHC units. Additionally, archival data (ie, documents, email correspondence, reports on the clinical trial) from the years 2007-2010 were analysed.The study identified barriers to the implementation of the clinical trial in the project characteristics, the medical professionals, the patients, and the social network, as well as in the organizational, economic and political context. The project increased staff workload and created tension as the PHC culture and the research activities clashed (eg, because of the systematic use of questionnaires and changes in scheduling and planning of patient visits). Furthermore, there was a perception that the PHC units' management did not sufficiently support the project and that the project lacked basic incentives for reaching a sustainable resolution. Despite efforts by the project managers to enhance and support implementation of the innovation, they were unable to overcome these barriers. The study illustrates the complexity and barriers of performing clinical trials in the PHC.

SUBMITTER: Richter-Sundberg L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4353206 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Improving treatment of depression in primary health care: a case study of obstacles to perform a clinical trial designed to implement practice guidelines.

Richter-Sundberg Linda L Nyström Monica Elisabeth ME Krakau Ingvar I Sandahl Christer C

Primary health care research & development 20140627 2

<h4>Aim</h4>The aim of this study is to investigate factors contributing to the failure of a randomized clinical trial designed to implement and test clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression in primary health care (PHC).<h4>Background</h4>Although the occurrence of depression is increasing globally, many patients with depression do not receive optimal treatment. Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression, which aim to establish evidence-based clinical practi ...[more]

PMID: 24969945

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOsteoporotic hip fractures typically occur in frail elderly patients with multiple comorbidities, and repair of the fracture within 48 h is recommended. Pre-operative evaluation sometimes involves transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) to screen for heart disease that would alter peri-operative management, yet TTE can delay surgery and is resource intensive. Evidence suggests that the use of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) can improve care. It is unclear which guidelines are most useful in hip fracture patients.Questions/purposesWe sought to evaluate the performance of the five commonly used CPGs in determining which patients with acute fragility hip fracture require TTE and to identify common features among high-performing CPGs that could be incorporated into care pathways.Patients and methodsWe performed a retrospective study of medical records taken from an institutional database of osteoporotic hip fracture patients to identify those who underwent pre-operative TTE. History and physical examination findings were recorded; listed indications for TTE were compared against those given in five commonly used CPGs: those from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA), the British Society of Echocardiography (BSE), the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Anaesthesiology(ESC/ESA), the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI), and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). We then calculated the performance (sensitivity and specificity) of the CPGs in identifying patients with TTE results that had the potential to change peri-operative management.ResultsWe identified 100 patients who underwent pre-operative TTE. Among those, the patients met criteria for TTE 32 to 66% of the time, depending on the CPG used. In 14% of those receiving TTE, the test revealed new information with the potential to change management. The sensitivity of the CPGs ranged from 71% (ESC/ESA and AAGBI) to 100% (ACC/AHA and SIGN). The CPGs' specificity ranged from 37% (BSE) to 74% (ESC/ESA). The more sensitive guidelines focused on a change in clinical status in patients with known disease or clinical concern regarding new-onset disease.ConclusionsIn patients requiring fixation of osteoporotic hip fractures, TTE can be useful for identifying pathologies that could directly change peri-operative management. Our data suggest that established CPGs can be safely used to identify which patients should undergo pre-operative TTE with low risk of missed pathology.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent clinical practice guidelines from major national organizations, including a joint United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Department of Defense (DoD) committee, have substantially changed recommendations for the use of the cholesterol-lowering statin medications after years of relative stability. Because statin medications are among the most commonly prescribed treatments in the United States, any change in their use may have significant implications for patients and providers alike. Prior research has shown that effective implementation interventions should be both user centered and specifically chosen to address identified barriers. OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this study were to identify potential determinants of provider uptake of the new statin guidelines and to use that information to tailor a coordinated and streamlined local quality improvement intervention focused on prescribing appropriate statins. METHODS:We employed user-centered design principles to guide the development and testing of a multicomponent guideline implementation intervention to improve statin prescribing. This paper describes the intervention development process whereby semistructured qualitative interviews with providers were conducted to (1) illuminate the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of providers and (2) elicit feedback on intervention prototypes developed to align with and support the use of the VA/DoD guidelines. Our aim was to use this information to design a local quality improvement intervention focused on statin prescribing that was tailored to the needs of primary care providers at our facility. Cabana's Clinical Practice Guidelines Framework for Improvement and Nielsen's Usability Heuristics were used to guide the analysis of data obtained in the intervention development process. RESULTS:Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 primary care Patient Aligned Care Team professionals (13 physicians and 2 clinical pharmacists) at a single VA medical center. Findings highlight that providers were generally comfortable with the paradigm shift to risk-based guidelines but less clear on the need for the VA/DoD guidelines in specific. Providers preferred a clinical decision support tool that helped them calculate patient risk and guide their care without limiting autonomy. They were less comfortable with risk communication and performance measurement systems that do not account for shared decision making. When possible, we incorporated their recommendations into the intervention. CONCLUSIONS:By combining qualitative methods and user-centered design principles, we could inform the design of a multicomponent guideline implementation intervention to better address the needs and preferences of providers, including clear and direct language, logical decision prompts with an option to dismiss a clinical decision support tool, and logical ordering of feedback information. Additionally, this process allowed us to identify future design considerations for quality improvement interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Network meta-analysis compares multiple treatment options for the same condition and may be useful for developing clinical practice guidelines. PURPOSE:To compare treatment recommendations for first-line medical therapy for primary open angle-glaucoma (POAG) from major updates of American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) guidelines with the evidence available at the time, using network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched on 11 March 2014 for randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of glaucoma monotherapies compared with placebo, vehicle, or no treatment or other monotherapies. The AAO Web site was searched in August 2014 to identify AAO POAG guidelines. STUDY SELECTION:Eligible RCTs were selected by 2 independent reviewers, and guidelines were selected by 1 person. DATA EXTRACTION:One person abstracted recommendations from guidelines and a second person verified. Two people independently abstracted data from included RCTs. DATA SYNTHESIS:Guidelines were grouped together on the basis of literature search dates, and RCTs that existed at 1991, 1995, 1999, 2004, and 2009 were analyzed. The outcome of interest was intraocular pressure (IOP) at 3 months. Only the latest guideline made a specific recommendation: prostaglandins. Network meta-analyses showed that all treatments were superior to placebo in decreasing IOP at 3 months. The mean reductions (95% credible intervals [CrIs]) for the highest-ranking class compared with placebo were as follows: 1991: ?-blockers, 4.01 (CrI, 0.48 to 7.43); 1995: ?2-adrenergic agonists, 5.64 (CrI, 1.73 to 9.50); 1999: prostaglandins, 5.43 (CrI, 3.38 to 7.38); 2004: prostaglandins, 4.75 (CrI, 3.11 to 6.44); 2009: prostaglandins, 4.58 (CrI, 2.94 to 6.24). LIMITATION:When comparisons are informed by a small number of studies, the treatment effects and rankings may not be stable. CONCLUSION:For timely recommendations when multiple treatment options are available, guidelines developers should consider network meta-analysis. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE:National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health.

Dataset Information

Improving treatment of depression in primary health care: a case study of obstacles to perform a clinical trial designed to implement practice guidelines.

Publications

Improving treatment of depression in primary health care: a case study of obstacles to perform a clinical trial designed to implement practice guidelines.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets