Session 0: Overcoming Barriers to Implementation
Moderator: Jean Slutsky, P.A., M.S.P.H., AHCPR
Panel members: Catherine Borbas, Ph.D., M.P.H., Healthcare Education and Research
Foundation (HERF), Minneapolis; and David E. Kanouse, Ph.D, RAND Corporation
Implementing Changes in Health Care Organizations: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges— Catherine Borbas, Ph.D., M.P.H.
The Healthcare Education and Research Foundation (HERF) assists medical service providers and
purchasers in integrating quality improvement methods with procedures for accountability.
HERF's model to change behavior includes collecting research information, providing clinicians
with an awareness of this information, gaining clinician acceptance of the need for modification,
and providing a framework for adoption of change. Two primary assumptions have driven this
process: (1) with clinically credible information, clinicians will modify their behavior to improve
care, and (2) if physicians are involved in the developmental process, they will move quickly to
alter deficient systems.
HERF evaluated the effectiveness of approaches to modify hospital, health plan, and clinician
behavior as part of an implementation strategy study conducted to improve quality of care for
acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Thirty-seven sites participated, and standardized data were
collected on the use of four target drugs: thrombolytic agents, aspirin, beta blockers, and
lidocaine. Evidence-based guidelines (from the American College of Cardiology) support the
effectiveness of the first three and recommend prophylactic avoidance of the latter. HERF
surveyed current knowledge and practice patterns, identified opinion leaders (who tend to be early
adopters of improved methods), and compared aggregate performance data with results of the
knowledge survey.
The intervention study found improved rates of aspirin and beta blocker use. However, despite a
good knowledge base on appropriate use of these drugs, inconsistency remained between
knowledge and practice. For thrombolytics, clinicians were reluctant to take an action that might
be associated with complications such as stroke or with negative experience or psychosocial
barriers. Multiple, informal interventions are often necessary before required changes are
implemented. Organizations may be more amenable to systematic change than individuals but
must also overcome barriers such as resource constraints, competitive factors, and resistance to
protocol changes.
To achieve best results, key hospital audiences and influencers in all clinical stakeholder groups
need to be identified, coordination undertaken in iterative implementation efforts with all
stakeholders including health plans, and resources made available to assist clinicians in applying
guideline recommendations.
Overcoming Barriers to Implementation—David E. Kanouse, Ph.D.
The Women's Health and Hysterectomy Project is a study on guideline implementation for
hysterectomy. It evaluated strategies for implementing practice recommendations, testing social
influence and state-of-the-art educational intervention, and evaluating appropriateness of care
before and after intervention. Hysterectomy was chosen because of the availability of recent
assessments and practice recommendations, because appropriateness could be easily measured
against defined criteria, and because the criteria and recommendations could be readily
updated.
The study employed RAND appropriateness methodology, which can evaluate practice changes
using chart review, determine patient profiles, and provide good feedback to practitioners. The
study goal was to transform appropriateness ratings into clinically useful recommendations that
clinicians would "buy into" and effectively use. The targeted practitioner group
consisted of capitated physician practices.
Lessons learned from the study fell into broad categories:
- In the translation of appropriateness ratings into recommendations, indicators were structured along a sequential pattern, like the actual step-by-step practices of clinicians. Appropriateness ratings showed that alternative diagnostic tests or treatments should be considered prior to procedures such as hysterectomy.
- The recruitment strategy failed for community hospitals but succeeded with capitated physician groups.
- The intervention strategy concentrated on selecting local, influential physicians on the basis of their credibility, respect from their colleagues, and involvement in quality improvement activities. The study provided these clinicians with training and output from national panel recommendations, tailored recommendations to their own practice settings, engaged them in participatory development, and provided critical support for followup activities.
- A local focus group was convened to review the educational aspects of conveying recent medical advances and cutting edge technologies. This local review and modification of panel recommendations created a sense of ownership and buy-in.
- Barriers encountered included differing perspectives on the necessity of change, the need for local participation, the need to link recommendations with the clinical decisionmaking process (such as helping to develop checklists for clinicians), and the necessity of integrating appropriateness ratings with real-life patient management scenarios.
- As to the tools used, the study demonstrated that (a) guidelines for implementation can be developed if it is recognized that much work and many unanticipated steps may be required, (b) appropriateness ratings can be a good starting point, and (c) selection for study of a procedure with weak scientific evidence (like hysterectomy), while a complication, also more accurately reflects the real world, where most procedures are cloaked in uncertainty.
The study concluded that to overcome barriers to implementation, practitioners must view
practice guidelines as clinically useful, have ownership of responsibility, and receive the
opportunity to modify draft reports before buying in to final recommendations. This is facilitated
by providing credible guidelines linked to an existing structure and supported by substantive
scientific evidence. Recommendations must also be relevant and targeted to program management
using epidemiologic or descriptive data. A lesson of the study was that many unnecessary
hysterectomies are being performed; with appropriate emphasis on the most prevalent and
important scenarios, the potential for positive change is enhanced.
Return to Contents
Session P: Implementing Guidelines in Specific Populations and Settings
Moderator: Carolyn M. Clancy, M.D., AHCPR
Panel members: E. Andrew Balas, M.D., Ph.D., University of Missouri; Rita A. Frantz, Ph.D.,
R.N., F.A.A.N., University of Iowa, and George C. Xakellis, Jr., M.D., M.B.A., Ford Motor
Company; and Eric W. Boberg, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin
Evidence-based Implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines—E. Andrew Balas, M.D., Ph.D.
The main quality concerns in health care are inconsistency in practice patterns, noncompliance
with widely accepted standards, lack of substantiating evidence on benefits of a procedure or
practice, and excess cost that threatens business survival. In addition, substantive medical research
results often are not reflected in practice until many years after publication in the literature.
To support the goal of transforming medical management through guideline recommendations, 6
years ago AHCPR funded a registry of medical interventions, the Columbia Registry of
Information and Process Management Trials. The number of such trials is increasing by 50
percent annually, with trial reports published on computerized information interventions,
noncomputerized information interventions, and utilization management interventions.
In approximately 100 studies that tested computerized interventions, the most studied
intervention, and the most successful, was the physician reminder message (or prompt) that
arrives at the time of decisionmaking. Other physician interventions studied included
computerized treatment planners, feedback systems, and diagnostic systems. Aside from physician
prompting, effective information services in health care include patient reminders, information
feedback, patient education (which can be computerized), and treatment design.
Two common types of information intervention are "profiling" and the "clinical
direct report." Profiling, or peer comparison feedback, is imposed on 50 percent of U.S.
physicians but has been shown to have a negligible contribution to improved quality of health care
and to be costly as well. The "clinical direct report," however, is an effective way to
channel published information to practitioners who need it. In simple tabular format, it compares
the targeted medical center with other centers in its State and with all centers in the United States
in regard to utilization of a particular procedure. Dissemination of such reports was shown in one
study to improve usage of a particular procedure by 14 percent.
Implementing Pressure Ulcer Guidelines in Long-Term Care—Rita A. Frantz, Ph.D., R.N., F.A.A.N., and George C. Xakellis, Jr., M.D., M.B.A.
A study was performed at the University of Iowa to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of
implementing a guideline for pressure ulcer management. The research was based on the
Weinstein and Russell models for analyzing cost effectiveness. "Health benefits" were
defined and measured as the number of years of added healthy life. Costs of prevention also were
analyzed, as well as costs of treatment necessitated because prevention failed.
The setting for the study was a 77-bed, long-term care facility in the Midwest. The study subjects
were residents of the facility who were free of pressure ulcers. Before the AHCPR
guideline-based prevention protocols were carried out at the facility, no systematic prevention measures had been in place. The protocol, implemented over a 6-month period, consisted of administrative support, services
of a skin care consultant, development of institutional policies and procedures, and intensive,
mandatory staff education. Staff performance was monitored and feedback provided; performance
evaluations were linked to compliance with the skin care protocol. Data were collected for 6
months before and after implementation of the protocol.
Demographic data were collected as well as risk factors and prevention and treatment activities.
Prevention activities at the facility consisted of repositioning and use of pressure-reducing
devices. Ulcer treatments included use of wound care supplies, laboratory tests, x-ray procedures,
and systemic antibiotics. Costs were calculated in relation to (1) direct care (cost of nursing time
and supplies and equipment), (2) indirect care (staff education and personnel and clinical
management), and (3) nursing administration overhead.
The pressure ulcer protocols worked both clinically and financially. With the protocol, the ulcers
in the facility were almost completely eliminated. Implementation of better practice did not cost
any more; rather, resources were reallocated. Before the protocol was instituted, no expenditures
had been made for prevention. After the protocol, $11,877 had been spent on preventive
measures, most related to repositioning the patients. The higher the risk assessment for a patient,
the more expended on interventions. Treatment costs before the protocol implementation
amounted to $12,774, and after implementation to $914. The amount spent in the study on
prevention roughly equaled what had earlier been spent on treatment, but with an increase in the
number of ulcer-free days. Cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the cost per ulcer-free day was
$1.60.
The study showed that: pressure ulcer prevention programs can be implemented with little
additional cost; highly technical equipment is not necessary in long-term care to achieve desired
outcomes; a successful intervention program increases the intensity of interventions as patient risk
increases; and prevention programs require staff training and ongoing supervision to be
successful.
Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System (CHESS): In-Home, Computer-Based Patient Education and Support—Eric W. Boberg, Ph.D.
The Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System (CHESS) was conceived as a computer
intervention when persons faced with a health care crisis need to acquire complex information
confidentially and quickly. The goals of CHESS are to improve quality of life, reduce cost of care,
improve adherence to treatment, and increase the consumer role in health care. An in-home or
community-centered computer-based program was thought to be an excellent tool for these
purposes. The system developers searched the literature for theoretical models of crisis and
assembled a group of tools for use in a health care crisis. Expert systems, information databases,
and computer-mediated communications (support groups) were developed. Needs assessment
was conducted among the intended users of each CHESS module. Some of the modules currently
in the system address HIV, breast cancer, heart disease, and caregivers of Alzheimer's patients.
Emphasis was placed on interfacing with persons with little previous exposure to computers. The
reading level of the project is at about the eighth grade.
Services provided comprise information, communication, and analysis. Information services
include databases, questions and answers, full-text articles, consumer guides, a referral directory,
personal stories, and a dictionary of words and phrases. Communications services include closed
on-line support groups with moderators and "Ask an Expert." Analysis services for
the HIV module, for example, include risk of transmission, symptom assessment, stress
assessments, decision aids, action plans, and personal profiles. This information can later be given
to the health care provider.
CHESS has been subjected to evaluation research and randomized controlled trials to assess the
effectiveness and outcomes of the system. Research results have consistently shown better quality
of life for CHESS users.
The typical user accesses the program about once a day over a 4-month period, often at night.
Women, elderly, minorities, and less-educated persons all use the system heavily. CHESS plans to
include topics for those health problems that result in 90 percent of cost expenditures, a total of
40 to 50 topics. Developing a new CHESS module can take from 6 to 18 months and costs from
$75,000 to $300,000 depending on complexity of the subject and how much research is already
available. A patient needs assessment starts each project.
CHESS is being converted for dissemination over the Internet, and all new modules will be
developed for the Internet. Providing the system over the Internet raises issues about cost for
Internet service, dependence on telephone lines, linkage to other Web sites, sophistication (naive
or expert) of users, and research data collection (easier on the current system).
Return to Contents
Data Needs for Quality Measurement and Improvement
David Blumenthal, M.D., Massachusetts General Hospital
Useful questions for quality measurement and management in the next 5 to 10 years, with
significant implications for policy and research, includes: How will definitions of quality change
over time? How will approaches to quality measurement and management change? How will
changes in measurement and management affect infrastructure needs? What are the policy
implications, especially for equity and cost? What are the implications for our research
agenda?
Quality varies with roles in the health care system and with the process of health care production.
The availability and affordability of medical information to patients, health care providers, and
provider organizations through new information technology will permit patients to self-manage
illness and to audit a doctor's performance. Also, nonprofessional health care personnel will be
able to manage illness outside of health care settings. As the process of preserving health and
managing chronic and subacute illness becomes more decentralized and less professionalized,
important aspects of quality will be how well organizations and individuals confront
self-management issues.
The definition of quality of a health care organization will change in the interim. Structural
measures will include information system capabilities, the training and availability of certified
nonmedical health care professionals, and new forms of physician certification. Process measures
will include self-management, the generation and use of patient electronic feedback, and patient
assessments of quality of care. Outcome measures will address reduced cycle time for
development and validation of disease-specific self-reports.
These changes in measurement and management have implications for both infrastructure and
policy. Information Systems (IS) and Research and Development (R&D) play a central role in
sustaining and improving quality and in the diversification of personnel needs and training
requirements. The associated short-term policy implications are continued consolidation in the
health care industry, competitive advantages to large for-profit and nonprofit organizations, and
disadvantages to the public sector and small non-profits. Longer term policy implications are
disintermediation for educated consumers (e.g., decreased role for health plans in ensuring quality,
direct purchaser-provider relationships) and inequities created by the ability to manage
information and interact with information systems.
These postulated trends raise a number of questions, such as: What are the reality, extent, and
importance of self-management? Specifically, which conditions lend themselves to
self-management and how will the role of physicians change? How important will the
psychological value of face-to-face provider-patient interaction be to the viability of telemedicine
and Internet-based medicine? Will inequities increase as a result of the availability of information?
If so, how will they be measured? What are the privacy concerns regarding the use of the Internet
for exchange of personal health care information? In response to these questions, the presenter
stated the following.
- To improve the quality of information on the Internet, some degree of regulatory intervention will be necessary. There should be an industry rating for Internet medical information systems.
- Patient adherence to treatment during self-management will depend on the availability of easy-to-use software that allows patients to enter information and receive personalized reports on how well controlled their illnesses are, with recommendations.
- If Internet "push" technology that targets information to a user based on selected characteristics is used, then the interface with the patient must be transparent.
- Capital and personnel requirements for these innovations will be in the private sector. The role of the Federal Government will be to make private sector discoveries more widely available to different groups, to basic research, and to areas of research ignored by the public sector.
Return to Contents
Health Information Privacy
Lawrence 0. Gostin, J.D., L.L.D. (Hon.), Georgetown University Law Center
The health information infrastructure is the framework that underlies the electronic collection,
storage, use, and transmission of information supporting the essential functions of the public
health care system. The infrastructure will be quite diverse: patient data may be captured in an
electronic longitudinal record; by electronic card technologies, and by comprehensive health
databases. This electronic collection of health data can be supported with reasonable assurance of protection of privacy. Future health care information infrastructures can affect individual and group privacy, human
goods accrued from the collection of these data, current legal safeguards, and future
proposals.
Some privacy risks are associated with the electronic automation of health care records. Security
can be breached and different records can be matched to create a more comprehensive and
identifiable record. Likewise, the proliferation of systemic users with authorized access to health
information makes it impossible to adequately police and secure records to prevent fraudulent use.
Lastly, there are instances of unauthorized but lawful access (e.g., the purchase and sale of health
information). Nevertheless, electronic automation of health information provides benefits such as
consumer choice among health plans, improved monitoring and effectiveness of services, better
assessment of system performance, improved administrative efficiency, and safeguards for the
public's health through better surveillance.
Despite legal safeguards, considerable inconsistencies exist in privacy protection throughout the
United States. The privacy of government records is protected through the Privacy Act and the
Freedom of Information Act, but both have substantial loopholes. Most States have statutes to
help protect information collection by health departments but not by the private sector and
restrictive statutes that only protect certain diseases. These variations among rules for different
diseases thwart efficient collection and transmission of data.
There are fundamental problems with the way privacy is viewed. The confidentiality of the
doctor-patient relationship implies that information remains solely with the doctor. Yet in the
current age, information is also collected by laboratories, managed care organizations, public
health departments, and other organizations This poses two theoretical problems. First, ethical
and legal safeguards are based primarily on the holder of the record, but electronic records have
no holder. Second, because the law is based on the doctor-patient relationship, only a breach of
that relationship can evoke legal penalties. To protect the privacy of automated health care
records, penalties must be attached to anyone who discloses information, not just the holder of the
record. Some proposals for law reform on public health information privacy follow.
- Data Protection Review. Establish an independent body to review data collection, use, privacy and security standards.
- Data Collection Justification. Impose a burden on any collector of information to demonstrate its value for public health purposes.
- Information for Subjects. Allow subjects to know the purpose, time frame, and access restrictions for the information collected on them—they are entitled to that information.
- Fair Information Practices. No secret data systems exist—give patients access to information about themselves so they can correct and amend records and expunge unneeded information.
- Secondary Uses of the Data. Require the consent of the individual to use information for a purpose beyond those originally intended.
Policy discussions and claims to the public should not be based on absolute privacy. There should
be reasonable assurances that when personal information is collected, health care providers, health
care plans, and Government and public health departments will treat the information with respect,
store it in an orderly and secure manner, and disclose it only for important health-related purposes
and in accordance with publicly accountable principles of fairness.
Return to Contents
Final Session: Evidence-based Practice—An International Perspective
Moderator: Steven H. Woolf, M.D., M.P.H.
Panel members: Jeremy M. Grimshaw, M.B., C.H.C.B., M.R.C.G.P., Department of General
Practice, University of Aberdeen; J. A. Muir Gray, M.D., Anglia & Oxford NHS Executive, UK;
and Carmi Margolis, M.D., M.A., Ben Gurion University, Israel
Evidence-based Practice: An International Perspective—Steven H. Woolf, M.D., M.P.H.
Work in evidence-based practice outside the United States includes: the Cochrane Collaboration
in the UK; the technology assessment (TA) work being done in Canada, Thailand, and the
Phillippines; the work in Scandinavia in utilizing evidence in the practice setting; and the
production of practice guidelines in France and Holland. Collaboration between the United States
and these European nations could bring new contributions to the field of evidence-based
practice.
International Perspectives on Implementation Research—Jeremy M. Grimshaw, M.B., C.H.C.B., M.R.C.G.P.
The traditional model of disseminating research findings to physicians by publishing in journals has
been unsuccessful. A new approach, using systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines,
seems more promising. Collaboration efforts have begun and promise to decrease duplication of
effort across groups and nations. Systematic reviews identify crucial studies and synthesize the
findings to ease their application in practice. An increasing recognition of the failure of the
traditional dissemination model has led to international efforts to improve the influence of
evidence on clinical practice.
Developing Evidence-based Health Care in the United Kingdom—J. A. Muir Gray, M.D.
The effort to produce evidence-based policy in the U.K. grew out of the concern that research
studies, once published, quickly become outdated. To develop better evidence-based policy,
systematic reviews must be used to filter out useless information and retain relevant facts,
combining data when possible. The World Wide Web offers a viable solution to the problems of
traditional dissemination by allowing physicians to quickly locate necessary information. For
example, the Consumer Health Information Project (CHIP), a collaborative effort to put up the
best and most accurate health information on the Web, represents one of the many new efforts to
manage health knowledge. Ultimately, organizations must adapt their culture to encourage use
and comfort with evidence-based practice, and individuals must develop skills in searching,
appraising, and storing evidence.
Logic Methodology of Clinical Practice Guidelines—Carmi Margolis, M.D., M.A.
The algorithm, the logic structure of clinical practice guidelines, is a step-by-step approach for
solving a problem. Decision points in guidelines are grounded in rationale based on scientific
evidence. However, some guideline decisions do not rely solely on scientific evidence, and require
expert opinion to fill in the gaps. Nonetheless, algorithms have been shown to yield highly
accurate rates of diagnoses by technicians. They can serve as tools for comparing differences
between competing guidelines or they can assess a guideline's reproducibility.
Return to Contents
Internet Citation:
Translating Evidence into Practice 1997, Conference Summary. Agency for Health Care
Policy and Research, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/trip1997/