UNASSIGNED: The global burden of peripheral artery disease (PAD) has been increasing. Guidelines for PAD recommend evidence-based medical therapy (EBMT) to reduce the risks of cardiovascular events and death but the implementation of this is highly variable. This study aimed to understand the current practices regarding EBMT prescription in PAD patients and the key barriers and facilitators for implementing PAD guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: A qualitative study was conducted in the largest tertiary hospital in Singapore from December 2021 to March 2023. The participants included healthcare professionals and in-patient pharmacists involved in the care of PAD patients, as well as patients with PAD who had undergone a lower limb angioplasty revascularisation procedure. Data were collected through in-depth, individual semi-structured interviews conducted face-to-face or remotely by a trained research assistant. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and systematically coded using data management software NVivo 12.0. The Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework was used to guide the interviews and analysis.
UNASSIGNED: Twelve healthcare professionals (4 junior consultants, 7 senior consultants, and 1 senior in-patient pharmacist) and 4 patients were recruited. Nine themes in 7 domains emerged. Only a small proportion of doctors were aware of the relevant guidelines, and the generalisability of guidelines to patients with complicated conditions was the doctors\' main concern. Other barriers included cost, frequent referrals, lack of interprofessional collaboration, not being the patients\' long-term care providers, short consultation time and patients\' limited medication knowledge.
UNASSIGNED: Findings from this study may inform strategies for improving healthcare professionals\' adherence to guidelines and patients\' medication adherence.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline was a paradigm shift in lipid management and identified the four statin-benefit groups. Many have studied the guideline\'s potential impact, but few have investigated its potential long-term impact on MACE. Furthermore, most studies also ignored the confounding effect from the earlier release of generic atorvastatin in Dec 2011.
METHODS: To evaluate the potential (long-term) impact of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline release in Nov 2013 in the U.S., we investigated the association of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline with the trend changes in 5-Year MACE survival and three other statin-related outcomes (statin use, optimal statin use, and statin adherence) while controlling for generic atorvastatin availability using interrupted time series analysis, called the Chow\'s test. Specifically, we conducted a retrospective study using U.S. nationwide de-identified claims and electronic health records from Optum Labs Database Warehouse (OLDW) to follow the trends of 5-Year MACE survival and statin-related outcomes among four statin-benefit groups that were identified in the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline. Then, Chow\'s test was used to discern trend changes between generic atorvastatin availability and guideline potential impact.
RESULTS: 197,021 patients were included (ASCVD: 19,060; High-LDL: 33,907; Diabetes: 138,159; High-ASCVD-Risk: 5,895). After the guideline release, the long-term trend (slope) of 5-Year MACE Survival for the Diabetes group improved significantly (P = 0.002). Optimal statin use for the ASCVD group also showed immediate improvement (intercept) and long-term positive changes (slope) after the release (P < 0.001). Statin uses did not have significant trend changes and statin adherence remained unchanged in all statin-benefit groups. Although no other statistically significant trend changes were found, overall positive trend change or no changes were observed after the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline release.
CONCLUSIONS: The 2013 ACA/AHA Guideline release is associated with trend improvements in the long-term MACE Survival for Diabetes group and optimal statin use for ASCVD group. These significant associations might indicate a potential positive long-term impact of the 2013 ACA/AHA Guideline on better health outcomes for primary prevention groups and an immediate potential impact on statin prescribing behaviors in higher-at-risk groups. However, further investigation is required to confirm the causal effect of the 2013 ACA/AHA Guideline.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of chronic kidney disease (CKD) associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are designed to assist healthcare professionals with clinical decision making by providing recommendations on the screening, detection, management, and treatment of these conditions. However, primary care practitioners (PCPs) may have clinical inertia when it comes to routinely enacting CKD and T2D guideline recommendations in their clinical practices. Guideline developers have published a range of resources with the aim of facilitating easier access to guideline recommendations to support efficient and consistent implementation into clinical practice of PCPs. Challenges remain in providing strategies to reduce inertia in the application of guideline recommendations in primary care. In this review, we explore reasons behind the low level of awareness and poor uptake of published evidence-based care approaches to the optimal management of patients with T2D and CKD. Finally, we present suggestions on strategies to improve the implementation of guideline-directed recommendations in primary care.
Clinical practice guidelines for managing chronic kidney disease (CKD) for people who also have type 2 diabetes (T2D) provide healthcare providers with recommendations on how to identify, diagnose, and treat CKD. Although treatments cannot cure CKD, they can help to reduce the risk of CKD getting worse. The recommendations are based on results of clinical trials that tested how safe and how well a medication works among many people with CKD and T2D. If these clinical trials show that the medicine is beneficial for people with CKD and T2D, then it may be included in guideline recommendations. Most people living with T2D and early-stage CKD are treated by their primary care practitioner (PCP). If PCPs are not fully aware of guideline recommendations, then their patients may lose the opportunity to receive medications that can benefit them. PCPs have said that barriers to implementing guideline recommendations in their clinical practices include too many guidelines and that the guidelines are difficult to understand and use in their offices. Guideline developers have thought of ways to make the guidelines easier to access and use. This includes putting the guidelines onto mobile apps, providing online resources, making versions more relevant to PCPs, and combining multiple guidelines. These approaches are helpful, but more work is needed. This review article talks about the reasons why PCPs are not always aware of the most up-to-date guideline recommendations for CKD and T2D, how guideline developers have found different ways of sharing the guideline recommendations, and what more can be done.

Health practitioners often insert and maintain central venous access devices (CVADs) as part of cancer care. One in four CVADs prematurely fail, which is associated with increased mortality, morbidity and a negative impact on quality of life. To support implementation of updated guidelines, eviQ Education developed a comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based CVADs eLearning package. An evaluation indicated that the eLearning supported clinicians\' practice and increased knowledge and clinical competency in CVAD insertion and management.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify all syncope units (SUs) in the Netherlands and assess the extent to which these SUs fulfil the essential requirements outlined by the consensus statements of the European Heart Rhythm Association and the European Society of Cardiology syncope guidelines. For this, we developed the SU-19 score, a novel guideline based validation tool for best practice.
RESULTS: All outpatient clinics of cardiology, neurology, and internal medicine in the Netherlands were screened for presence of any form of structured specialized syncope care. If present, these were included as SUs and requested to complete a questionnaire regarding syncope care. We assessed all SUs using the SU-19 score regarding structure (3 points), available tests (12 points), and initial evaluation (4 points). Twenty SUs were identified in the Netherlands, both academic (5/20) and non-academic hospitals (15/20), 17/20 reported multidisciplinary involvement during initial evaluation. In 19/20, neurology, cardiology, or both were responsible for the syncope management. Non-physicians were involved performing the head-up tilt test (44%) and initial evaluation (40%). The mean SU-19 score was 18.0 ± 1.1, 45% achieved the maximum score of 19 points. Variations were observed in protocols for active standing test, carotid sinus massage, and head-up tilt test.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a network of 20 SUs in the Netherlands. Forty-five per cent fully met the SU-19 score (mean 18.0 ± 1.1). Slight variety existed in protocols for autonomic function tests. Neurology and cardiology were mostly involved in syncope management. Non-physicians play an important role in syncope care.

UNASSIGNED: The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program guidelines emphasize environmental control as an integral part of asthma management; however, limited national-level data exist on how clinicians implement environmental control recommendations.
UNASSIGNED: We analyzed data on clinicians\' self-reported use of recommended environmental control practices in a nationally representative sample (n = 1645) of primary care physicians, asthma specialists, and advanced practice providers from the National Asthma Survey of Physicians, a supplemental questionnaire to the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.
UNASSIGNED: We examined clinician and practice characteristics as well as clinicians\' decisions and strategies regarding environmental trigger assessment and environmental control across provider groups. Regression modeling was used to identify clinician and practice characteristics associated with implementation of guideline recommendations.
UNASSIGNED: A higher percentage of specialists assessed asthma triggers at home, school, and/or work than primary care or advanced practice providers (almost always: 53.6% vs 29.4% and 23.7%, respectively, P < .001). Almost all clinicians (>93%) recommended avoidance of secondhand tobacco smoke, whereas recommendations regarding cooking appliances (eg, proper ventilation) were infrequent. Although assessment and recommendation practices differed between clinician groups, modeling results showed that clinicians who reported almost always assessing asthma control were 5- to 6-fold more likely to assess environmental asthma triggers. Use of asthma action plans was also strongly associated with implementation of environmental control recommendations.
UNASSIGNED: Environmental assessment and recommendations to patients varied among asthma care providers. High adherence to other key guideline components, such as assessing asthma control, was associated with environmental assessment and recommendation practices on environmental control.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical guidelines have expanded the indications for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) screening to type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity, which are conditions common in populations who receive care in urban safety-net settings. This study aimed to evaluate safety-net primary care and endocrinology clinicians\' knowledge of NAFLD, determine barriers and facilitators to screening, and examine perspectives on the use of electronic health record tools for risk assessment.
METHODS: Sequential explanatory mixed methods using survey and qualitative interviews with primary care, primary care subspecialty, and endocrinology clinicians in an urban safety-net health care system.
RESULTS: A total of 109 participants completed the survey (36.5% response rate), and 13 participated in interviews. Most respondents underestimated or did not know the prevalence of NAFLD (68%), did not use the recommended noninvasive tests for risk stratification (65%), and few were comfortable with screening for (27%) or managing (17%) NAFLD. Endocrinologists had greater knowledge of risk factors but lower rates of comfort and more often felt that screening was not their responsibility. The qualitative themes included the following: (1) lack of knowledge about screening, (2) concern for underdiagnosing NAFLD, (3) perception of severity impacts beliefs about screening, (4) screening should occur in primary care but is not normative practice, (5) concerns exist about benefit, (6) competing demands with a complex population hinder screening, and (7) a need for easier ways to integrate screening into practice.
CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge gaps may hamper uptake of new guidelines for NAFLD screening in primary care and endocrinology clinics in an urban safety-net health care system. Implementation strategies focused on training and educating clinicians and informed by behavioral economics may increase screening.

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline for diabetes management in chronic kidney disease (CKD) was updated in 2022, just 2 years after the previous update. The need for this rapid update is reflective of the recent and unprecedented positive results of numerous clinical trials aimed at reducing kidney and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in people with diabetes. The Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) work group for diabetes in CKD, convened by the National Kidney Foundation, provides herein a commentary on these changes, particularly the implications for health care in the United States. Changes to the KDIGO guideline mirror the evolution of sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists from purely antihyperglycemic agents to cardiorenal-metabolic therapeutics, and the lower estimated glomerular filtration rate of≥20mL/min/1.73m2 for SGLT2 inhibitor initiation. New data have also brought the addition of the first-in-class, Federal Drug Administration-approved nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone as an agent to reduce cardiorenal end points. While there has been significant progress in innovation, there remain serious challenges to implementation, particularly in the United States where inequities in insurance coverage and high costs limit their use, particularly in vulnerable populations, ultimately widening health care disparities.

BACKGROUND: Selecting effective implementation strategies to support guideline-concordant dental care is a complex process. We are drawing on data collected during the DISGO study to reflect on barriers we encountered in implementing a deliberative engagement process for discussing implementation strategies relevant to the evidence-based guideline targeted in this intervention. The goal is to identify factors that may influence the success of deliberative engagement as a technique to involve healthcare staff in identifying priorities for implementation strategies.
METHODS: We drew on online chat transcripts from the deliberative engagement forums collected during the DISGO study. The chat transcripts were automatically generated for each discussion and captured the written exchanges between participants and moderators in all participating dental clinics. Chat transcripts were analyzed following a content analysis approach.
RESULTS: Our findings revealed barriers to the successful implementation of deliberative engagement in the context of the DISGO study. Participants were not familiar with the materials that had been prepared for the forum and lacked familiarity with the topic of deliberation. Participants also did not share divergent viewpoints and reinforced existing ideas rather than introducing new ideas.
CONCLUSIONS: In order to ensure that obstacles that were encountered in this study are not repeated, it is important to carefully consider how staff can effectively be prepared for the deliberations. Participants must be familiar with the content of the guideline, and most questions about the content and evidence should be answered before the deliberative engagement sessions. If perspectives among staff on a guideline are homogenous, briefing materials should introduce perspectives that complement existing views among staff. It is also necessary to create an environment in which staff are comfortable introducing opinions that may not be held by the majority of colleagues.
BACKGROUND: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT04682730. The trial was first registered on 12/18/2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730 .