Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39716232›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2024

The role of guideline organizations in nationwide guideline implementation: a qualitative study.

Andrea C Thoonsen, Hanneke Merten, Toby T Broeders, Anika Gans, Ilse van Beusekom, Diana M J Delnoij, Martine C de Bruijne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Andrea C ThoonsenAmsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. a.thoonsen@amsterdamumc.nl.
Hanneke MertenAmsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Toby T BroedersAmsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anika GansAmsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ilse van BeusekomZorginstituut Nederland, Department of Care, Willem Dudokhof 1, NL-1112 ZA, Diemen, The Netherlands.
Diana M J DelnoijZorginstituut Nederland, Department of Care, Willem Dudokhof 1, NL-1112 ZA, Diemen, The Netherlands.
Martine C de BruijneAmsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch indicates suboptimal uptake and impact of clinical practice guidelines in Dutch healthcare. Dutch guideline organizations, i.e. guideline developers, governmental agencies, health insurers and other national organizations, develop, authorize and/or support the use of guidelines in Dutch clinical practice. These organizations influence the end users' awareness, accessibility, understanding, acceptability and applicability of guidelines and, therefore, play a crucial role in guideline implementation. This study explores how they plan, execute, monitor and evaluate guideline dissemination and implementation.

methodsUtilizing a qualitative design, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 participants from 24 guideline organizations. We conducted framework analysis, using theories on guideline implementation planning, the 'taxonomy of strategies for achieving guideline implementation and compliance' and the principles of logic models to analyse the data.

resultsMost guideline organizations made limited use of implementation planning approaches that are known to enhance guideline uptake and impact. These approaches include pre-identifying implementation barriers, engaging stakeholders and applying implementation theories, models and frameworks to select and tailor implementation strategies. Instead, they primarily relied on a standard set of predominantly dissemination and occasional implementation strategies known to be practical in terms of ease, cost and time. Commonly used implementation strategies included distributing, advertising and presenting guideline materials, along with providing additional implementation supporting materials. Regarding monitoring and evaluation methods, few organizations assessed the process, outcome or impact of guideline implementation. Those that did primarily relied on clinical peer review and benchmark information for their assessments.

conclusionsWhile Dutch guideline organizations recognized and endorsed the importance of implementation, this did not consistently translate into tailored implementation actions. Most guideline organizations did not have an integrated, structural and well-thought-out plan for implementation. The lack of regular, structured monitoring and evaluation raised uncertainties about the effectiveness of implementation in supporting end users and improving patient outcomes. Suggested follow-up research and practice enhancements could strengthen central-level implementation efforts, fostering more effective local implementation and, ultimately, improving health outcomes.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherencePractice Guidelines as TopicQualitative ResearchDelivery of Health CareHumansNetherlandsStakeholder ParticipationClinical practice guidelinesGuideline adherenceGuideline organizationsImplementation scienceQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID39716232
PMCPMC11668013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.