ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2026
Facilitators of Clinical Guideline Implementation in Tertiary Care: A Systematic Literature Review.
Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical guidelines (CGs) can improve the quality of care in tertiary hospitals-but only if they are actually used. Past reviews listed facilitators, but did not explain why some work and others fail. This review fills that gap by asking: Under what conditions do facilitators succeed? We systematically reviewed 6948 records (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Magiran, SID) through Nov 2025, selecting 45 high-quality studies. Using the MMAT tool and analytical thematic synthesis, we looked beyond what works to how and when it works. We found that three groups-policymakers, developers, and implementers-must work together in a cycle. Crucially, their actions only succeed under specific conditions: leadership helps only when it is visible, supported by resources, and accountable-not when it is top-down only, CGs are used more when they fit into daily workflow (e.g., emergency kits)-not just when they are simple or short, policies succeed only when paired with practical support (e.g., payment for guideline-based care, feedback systems). We also found that different health systems need different strategies: centralized systems need strong policy integration; high-autonomy settings need peer-led change; resource-limited settings need simple, adaptable tools. Successful implementation is not about more facilitators-but about better-aligned ones. We recommend a shift from top-down orders to collaborative, context-aware planning, where frontline staff, managers, and policymakers co-design solutions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41989690What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.