Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines

A Content Analysis of Patient Versions

Nancy Santesso (Corresponding Author), Gian Paolo Morgano, Susan M. Jack, R. Brian Haynes, Sophie Hill, Shaun Treweek, Holger J. Schünemann, DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are typically written for health care professionals but are meant to assist patients with health care decisions. A number of guideline producers have started to develop patient versions of CPGs to reach this audience. Objective. To describe the content and purpose of patient versions of CPGs and compare with patient and public views of CPGs. Design. A descriptive qualitative study with a directed content analysis of a sample of patient versions of CPGs published and freely available in English from 2012 to 2014. Results. We included 34 patient versions of CPGs from 17 guideline producers. Over half of the patient versions were in dedicated patient sections of national/professional agency websites. There was essentially no information about how to manage care in the health care system. The most common purpose was to equip people with information about disease, tests or treatments, and recommendations, but few provided quantitative data about benefits and harms of treatments. Information about beliefs, values and preferences, accessibility, costs, or feasibility of the interventions was rarely addressed. Few provided personal stories or scenarios to personalize the information. Three versions described the strength of the recommendation or the level of evidence. Limitations. Our search for key institutions that produce patient versions of guidelines was comprehensive, but we only included English and freely available versions. Future work will include other languages. Conclusions. This review describes the current landscape of patient versions of CPGs and suggests that these versions may not address the needs of their targeted audience. Research is needed about how to personalize information, provide information about factors contributing to the recommendations, and provide access.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)697-702
Number of pages6
JournalMedical Decision Making
Volume36
Issue number6
Early online date18 Apr 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2016

Fingerprint

Practice Guidelines
Guidelines
Delivery of Health Care
Language
Costs and Cost Analysis
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • patient decision making
  • risk communication
  • risk perception
  • clinical practice guidelines
  • qualitative methods

Cite this

Santesso, N., Morgano, G. P., Jack, S. M., Haynes, R. B., Hill, S., Treweek, S., ... DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group (2016). Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Content Analysis of Patient Versions. Medical Decision Making, 36(6), 697-702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X16644427

Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines : A Content Analysis of Patient Versions. / Santesso, Nancy (Corresponding Author); Morgano, Gian Paolo; Jack, Susan M.; Haynes, R. Brian ; Hill, Sophie; Treweek, Shaun; Schünemann, Holger J.; DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group.

In: Medical Decision Making, Vol. 36, No. 6, 01.08.2016, p. 697-702.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Santesso, N, Morgano, GP, Jack, SM, Haynes, RB, Hill, S, Treweek, S, Schünemann, HJ & DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group 2016, 'Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Content Analysis of Patient Versions', Medical Decision Making, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 697-702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X16644427
Santesso, Nancy ; Morgano, Gian Paolo ; Jack, Susan M. ; Haynes, R. Brian ; Hill, Sophie ; Treweek, Shaun ; Schünemann, Holger J. ; DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group. / Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines : A Content Analysis of Patient Versions. In: Medical Decision Making. 2016 ; Vol. 36, No. 6. pp. 697-702.
@article{c824c45727064339ad1345ea6b06531b,
title = "Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Content Analysis of Patient Versions",
abstract = "Background. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are typically written for health care professionals but are meant to assist patients with health care decisions. A number of guideline producers have started to develop patient versions of CPGs to reach this audience. Objective. To describe the content and purpose of patient versions of CPGs and compare with patient and public views of CPGs. Design. A descriptive qualitative study with a directed content analysis of a sample of patient versions of CPGs published and freely available in English from 2012 to 2014. Results. We included 34 patient versions of CPGs from 17 guideline producers. Over half of the patient versions were in dedicated patient sections of national/professional agency websites. There was essentially no information about how to manage care in the health care system. The most common purpose was to equip people with information about disease, tests or treatments, and recommendations, but few provided quantitative data about benefits and harms of treatments. Information about beliefs, values and preferences, accessibility, costs, or feasibility of the interventions was rarely addressed. Few provided personal stories or scenarios to personalize the information. Three versions described the strength of the recommendation or the level of evidence. Limitations. Our search for key institutions that produce patient versions of guidelines was comprehensive, but we only included English and freely available versions. Future work will include other languages. Conclusions. This review describes the current landscape of patient versions of CPGs and suggests that these versions may not address the needs of their targeted audience. Research is needed about how to personalize information, provide information about factors contributing to the recommendations, and provide access.",
keywords = "patient decision making, risk communication, risk perception, clinical practice guidelines, qualitative methods",
author = "Nancy Santesso and Morgano, {Gian Paolo} and Jack, {Susan M.} and Haynes, {R. Brian} and Sophie Hill and Shaun Treweek and Sch{\"u}nemann, {Holger J.} and {DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group}",
note = "Financial support for this study was provided to Nancy Santesso from a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Fellowship in Knowledge Translation. Financial support for this study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Fellowship in Knowledge Translation and for the DECIDE project from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement number 258583. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report.",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0272989X16644427",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "697--702",
journal = "Medical Decision Making",
issn = "0272-989X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines

T2 - A Content Analysis of Patient Versions

AU - Santesso, Nancy

AU - Morgano, Gian Paolo

AU - Jack, Susan M.

AU - Haynes, R. Brian

AU - Hill, Sophie

AU - Treweek, Shaun

AU - Schünemann, Holger J.

AU - DECIDE Workpackage 3 Group

N1 - Financial support for this study was provided to Nancy Santesso from a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Fellowship in Knowledge Translation. Financial support for this study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Fellowship in Knowledge Translation and for the DECIDE project from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement number 258583. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report.

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Background. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are typically written for health care professionals but are meant to assist patients with health care decisions. A number of guideline producers have started to develop patient versions of CPGs to reach this audience. Objective. To describe the content and purpose of patient versions of CPGs and compare with patient and public views of CPGs. Design. A descriptive qualitative study with a directed content analysis of a sample of patient versions of CPGs published and freely available in English from 2012 to 2014. Results. We included 34 patient versions of CPGs from 17 guideline producers. Over half of the patient versions were in dedicated patient sections of national/professional agency websites. There was essentially no information about how to manage care in the health care system. The most common purpose was to equip people with information about disease, tests or treatments, and recommendations, but few provided quantitative data about benefits and harms of treatments. Information about beliefs, values and preferences, accessibility, costs, or feasibility of the interventions was rarely addressed. Few provided personal stories or scenarios to personalize the information. Three versions described the strength of the recommendation or the level of evidence. Limitations. Our search for key institutions that produce patient versions of guidelines was comprehensive, but we only included English and freely available versions. Future work will include other languages. Conclusions. This review describes the current landscape of patient versions of CPGs and suggests that these versions may not address the needs of their targeted audience. Research is needed about how to personalize information, provide information about factors contributing to the recommendations, and provide access.

AB - Background. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are typically written for health care professionals but are meant to assist patients with health care decisions. A number of guideline producers have started to develop patient versions of CPGs to reach this audience. Objective. To describe the content and purpose of patient versions of CPGs and compare with patient and public views of CPGs. Design. A descriptive qualitative study with a directed content analysis of a sample of patient versions of CPGs published and freely available in English from 2012 to 2014. Results. We included 34 patient versions of CPGs from 17 guideline producers. Over half of the patient versions were in dedicated patient sections of national/professional agency websites. There was essentially no information about how to manage care in the health care system. The most common purpose was to equip people with information about disease, tests or treatments, and recommendations, but few provided quantitative data about benefits and harms of treatments. Information about beliefs, values and preferences, accessibility, costs, or feasibility of the interventions was rarely addressed. Few provided personal stories or scenarios to personalize the information. Three versions described the strength of the recommendation or the level of evidence. Limitations. Our search for key institutions that produce patient versions of guidelines was comprehensive, but we only included English and freely available versions. Future work will include other languages. Conclusions. This review describes the current landscape of patient versions of CPGs and suggests that these versions may not address the needs of their targeted audience. Research is needed about how to personalize information, provide information about factors contributing to the recommendations, and provide access.

KW - patient decision making

KW - risk communication

KW - risk perception

KW - clinical practice guidelines

KW - qualitative methods

U2 - 10.1177/0272989X16644427

DO - 10.1177/0272989X16644427

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 697

EP - 702

JO - Medical Decision Making

JF - Medical Decision Making

SN - 0272-989X

IS - 6

ER -