Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr 6;23(1):347.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x.

The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology-a systematic review

Ana-Mihaela Bora  1 , Vanessa Piechotta  2 , Nina Kreuzberger  2 , Ina Monsef  2 , Andreas Wender  2 , Markus Follmann  3 , Monika Nothacker  4 , Nicole Skoetz  2
Affiliations

The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology-a systematic review

Ana-Mihaela Bora et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Importance: Guideline recommendations do not necessarily translate into changes in clinical practice behaviour or better patient outcomes.

Objective: This systematic review aims to identify recent clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology and to determine their effect primarily on patient-relevant outcomes and secondarily on healthcare professionals' adherence.

Methods: A systematic search of five electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, GIN, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was conducted on 16 december 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) assessing the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies on patient-relevant outcomes (overall survival, quality of life, adverse events) and healthcare professionals' adherence outcomes (screening, referral, prescribing, attitudes, knowledge) in the oncological setting were targeted. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the ROBINS-I tool were used for assessing the risk of bias. Certainty in the evidence was evaluated according to GRADE recommendations. This review was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the identification number CRD42021268593.

Findings: Of 1326 records identified, nine studies, five cluster RCTs and four controlled before-and after studies, were included in the narrative synthesis. All nine studies assess the effect of multi-component interventions in 3577 cancer patients and more than 450 oncologists, nurses and medical staff.

Patient-level: Educational meetings combined with materials, opinion leaders, audit and feedback, a tailored intervention or academic detailing may have little to no effect on overall survival, quality of life and adverse events of cancer patients compared to no intervention, however, the evidence is either uncertain or very uncertain.

Provider-level: Multi-component interventions may increase or slightly increase guideline adherence regarding screening, referral and prescribing behaviour of healthcare professionals according to guidelines, but the certainty in evidence is low. The interventions may have little to no effect on attitudes and knowledge of healthcare professionals, still, the evidence is very uncertain.

Conclusions and relevance: Knowledge and skill accumulation through team-oriented or online educational training and dissemination of materials embedded in multi-component interventions seem to be the most frequently researched guideline implementation strategies in oncology recently. This systematic review provides an overview of recent guideline implementation strategies in oncology, encourages future implementation research in this area and informs policymakers and professional organisations on the development and adoption of implementation strategies.

Keywords: Behaviour; Clinical practice guideline; Guideline adherence; Healthcare professionals; Implementation; Oncology; Patient-relevant outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flowchart. RCT = randomized controlled trial; NRSIs = non-randomized studies of interventions
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Risk of bias in non-randomized controlled trials
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Key Messages Box for future guideline implementation research
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 1996;312(7023):71–72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. PMID: 24983061. - PubMed
    1. Storm-Versloot MN, Knops AM, Ubbink DT, Goossens A, Legemate DA, Vermeulen H. Long-term adherence to a local guideline on postoperative body temperature measurement: mixed methods analysis. J eval Clin Pract. 2012;18(4):841–847. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01687.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wiering B, Lyratzopoulos G, Hamilton W, Campbell J, Abel G. Concordance with urgent referral guidelines in patients presenting with any of six 'alarm' features of possible cancer: a retrospective cohort study using linked primary care records. BMJ Qual Saf. 2022;31(8):579–589. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2021-013425. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bhattacharya D, Easthall C, Willoughby KA, Small M, Watson S. Capecitabine non-adherence: exploration of magnitude, nature and contributing factors. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2012;18(3):333–342. doi: 10.1177/1078155211436022. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources