Effectiveness of implementation interventions in improving physician adherence to guideline recommendations in heart failure: a systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundThe uptake of guideline recommendations that improve heart failure (HF) outcomes remains suboptimal. We reviewed implementation interventions that improve physician adherence to these recommendations, and identified contextual factors associated with implementation success.MethodsWe searched databases from January 1990 to November 2017 for studies testing interventions to improve uptake of class I HF guidelines. We used the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care and Process Redesign frameworks for data extraction. Primary outcomes included: proportion of eligible patients offered guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy, self-care education, left ventricular function assessment and/or intracardiac devices. We reported clinical outcomes when available.ResultsWe included 38 studies. Provider-level interventions (n=13 studies) included audit and feedback, reminders and education. Organisation-level interventions (n=18) included medical records system changes, multidisciplinary teams, clinical pathways and continuity of care. System-level interventions (n=3) included provider/institutional incentives. Four studies assessed multi-level interventions. We could not perform meta-analyses due to statistical/conceptual heterogeneity. Thirty-two studies reported significant improvements in at least one primary outcome. Clinical pathways, multidisciplinary teams and multifaceted interventions were most consistently successful in increasing physician uptake of guidelines. Among randomised controlled trials (RCT) (n=10), pharmacist and nurse-led interventions improved target dose prescriptions. Eleven studies reported clinical outcomes; significant improvements were reported in three, including a clinical pathway, a multidisciplinary team and a multifaceted intervention. Baseline assessment of barriers, staff training, iterative intervention development, leadership commitment and policy/financial incentives were associated with intervention effectiveness. Most studies (n=20) had medium risk of bias; nine RCTs had low risk of bias.ConclusionOur study is limited by the quality and heterogeneity of the primary studies. Clinical pathways, multidisciplinary teams and multifaceted interventions appear to be most consistent in increasing guideline uptake. However, improvements in process outcomes were rarely accompanied by improvements in clinical outcomes. Our work highlights the need for improved research methodology to reliably assess the effectiveness of implementation interventions.

Twenty‐year time trends in use of evidence‐based heart failure drug therapy in Denmark

“…Initiatives to improve physicians’ adherence to guideline recommendations may be needed. A systematic review found that implementation of reminders in electronic medical records, clinical multidisciplinary teams, clinical pathways and multifaceted interventions, such as audit and feedback, might be effective . However, before widespread implementation of such interventions is recommendable, additional research of higher methodological quality on the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies is warranted .…”

Clinical and economic impact of the implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship program in four Colombian healthcare institutions

“…First, all four hospitals had antimicrobial guidelines based on their epidemiology elaborated by an infectious disease physician in conjunction with other relevant specialists. Inclusion of a multidisciplinary group to approve and adopt the antimicrobial guidelines likely increased its adherence, as it is suggested by other studies (14). Second, all hospitals had a steward dedicated to the ASP at least part time.…”

Mobile health applications for the detection of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review

“…Only a minority of studies (3/43) were RCTs, but this is not unusual in studies of health service and digital health interventions; for example, in a recent review of interventions that improved physician adherence to heart failure guidelines, only a minority of the studies (10/ 35) were RCTs. 71 Fourth, screening studies did not distinguish between paroxysmal or persistent AF in the population analysed. As the clinical characteristics of these two groups are likely to be different, the performance of each test might differ in each population.…”