210 likes | 407 Views
2. VA/DoD EBP Working Group Charter. Vision?advise ? on the use of practice guidelines to improve the quality of health and support population health management"Purposesadvise the VA/DoD Executive Councilidentify areas for guideline adaptationfacilitate adaptation processidentify maintenance processchampion the integration into information systemsensure integrationencourage research.
E N D
1. 1 Evidence Based Practice in VHAPresentation to the Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans Joseph Francis, MD, MPH
Deputy Chief Quality & Performance Officer
September 24, 2008
2. 2 VA/DoD EBP Working Group Charter Vision
“advise … on the use of practice guidelines to improve the quality of health and support population health management”
Purposes
advise the VA/DoD Executive Council
identify areas for guideline adaptation
facilitate adaptation process
identify maintenance process
champion the integration into information systems
ensure integration
encourage research
3. 3 Organization structure of the EBP WG with its five subgroup. The subgroups execute the actual work of the EBPWG. Their charge is to:
- Facilitating ongoing development of evidence-based clinical advances into practice
- Adapt, adopt, develop implement & sustain evidence-based clinical guidelines
- Foster integration of evidence-based practice into VA/DoD initiatives related to health promotion, disease prevention, and
wellness initiatives
- Assess the effectiveness of implementation & make recommendation for maximize performance improvement
- Champion integration of guidelines into current developing information systems
- Identify opportunities to make recommendation for research related to evidence-based practice within VA/DoD
Organization structure of the EBP WG with its five subgroup. The subgroups execute the actual work of the EBPWG. Their charge is to:
- Facilitating ongoing development of evidence-based clinical advances into practice
- Adapt, adopt, develop implement & sustain evidence-based clinical guidelines
- Foster integration of evidence-based practice into VA/DoD initiatives related to health promotion, disease prevention, and
wellness initiatives
- Assess the effectiveness of implementation & make recommendation for maximize performance improvement
- Champion integration of guidelines into current developing information systems
- Identify opportunities to make recommendation for research related to evidence-based practice within VA/DoD
4. 4 VA/DoD EBP Workgroup Members VA Members
Joseph Francis, MD- Co-Chair
Linda Kinsinger, MD – Director National Center for Prevention
Len Pogach MD – Chief Consultant, Diabetes
Rick Owens, MD - Medical Advisory Panel
Carla Cassidy, RN - Director, Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines
Patricia Rikli, RN - Employee Education System
David Atkins MD – Quality Enhancement Research Initiative
Peter Almenoff, MD - VISN 15
Doug Owens MD: HSR&D
Seyed Tirmizi, MD - Informatics DoD Members
COL Doreen Lounsbery, MD - Co-Chair
Army Medical Department
Lt Col Patrick Monahan, MD - Air Force
CDR Annette Von Thun, MD - Navy
Col Joyce Grissom, MD -Tricare
COL John Kugler, MD - Tricare
LTC Nhan Do, MD - Medical Informatics
Mark Hamra MD – Medical Informatics
COL Ernest Degenhardt, AN – Chief, Evidence-Based Practice
Lt Col James McCrary, RPh Pharmacoeconomics Center
CAPT Kevin Lee Gallagher, M.D., Region Representative VA Membership issues: New Chief Quality officer Dr Steve Fihl, ask that his deputy Dr Joe Francis be co-chair of the workgroup.
CDR McBreen has asked to be replaced by CDR Von Thun (Navy Rep)
The VA/DoD EBPWG has enters several partnership this year with other National Guideline Developers
1. Interorganoizational Guideline Forum With Kaiser Permanente, Institute for Clinical System Improvement (ICSI), Geisenger Health Plan
2. American Heart Association. In 2005 the AHA adopted the VA/DoD Stroke Rehabilitation Guideline as asked to work with us on the current update that is in progress.
3. American College of Physicians Work group provided panel members in the creation of the LBP CPG. Continue relationship with review of ACP guidelines and discuss further collaborations
VA Membership issues: New Chief Quality officer Dr Steve Fihl, ask that his deputy Dr Joe Francis be co-chair of the workgroup.
CDR McBreen has asked to be replaced by CDR Von Thun (Navy Rep)
The VA/DoD EBPWG has enters several partnership this year with other National Guideline Developers
1. Interorganoizational Guideline Forum With Kaiser Permanente, Institute for Clinical System Improvement (ICSI), Geisenger Health Plan
2. American Heart Association. In 2005 the AHA adopted the VA/DoD Stroke Rehabilitation Guideline as asked to work with us on the current update that is in progress.
3. American College of Physicians Work group provided panel members in the creation of the LBP CPG. Continue relationship with review of ACP guidelines and discuss further collaborations
5. 5 Features of the VA-DoD EBPWG Allows tailoring to the needs of the current or former warrior
may assist seamless transition
Free of Conflicts of Interest
Strong adoption of evidentiary standards
Focus on algorithms and other tools to assist providers
Able to drive clinical policy
6. 6 Current Clinical Practice Guidelines Post Deployment Health Assessment
Uncomplicated Pregnancy
Major Depressive Disorder
PTSD
Psychosis
Substance abuse disorder
Medically Unexplained Symptoms
Opioid Use in Chronic Pain
Mild TBI
Post Operative Pain
Bio/Chem/Rad/Blast Injury
Tobacco Use Cessation
Obesity
Amputation
Disease Prevention Heart Failure
Hypertension
Ischemic Heart Disease
Dyslipidemia
Diabetes Mellitus
Pre End Stage Renal Disease
COPD
Stroke Rehabilitation
Acute Stroke
Rehabilitation
Dysuria
Asthma
GERD
Glaucoma
Erectile Dysfunction
Low Back Pain
7. 7 Evidence as the Basisfor Clinical Policy
8. 8 Rating the Quality of Evidence (USPTF, 1996) Grade I: RCT
Grade II-1: nonrandomized trial
Grade II-2: cohort or case-control
Grade II-3: multiple time-series
Grade III: opinions of experts
9. 9 Rating System used for MUS Guideline (USPSTF, 1996) Grade A: Strong recommendation
Grade B: Recommended
Grade C: Recommendation not well established (may have value in some)
Grade D: Considered not useful/effective
Grade E: Strong evidence NOT to use (ineffective or harmful)
10. 10 Issues with Guidelines Patients with multiple problems and conditions
most clinical trials exclude
recommendations for one condition may contradict those for another
Conflicts of interest
are they “evidence” or “industry” based?
Special populations (e.g. elderly) not specifically studied in clinical trials
11. 11
12. 12 You don’t need a guideline to cover the basics: Professionalism
Compassion
Communication
Continuity and coordination
Responsiveness
Truth telling
Shared decision-making with patients and family
Teamwork
13. 13
14. 14
15. 15 Goals of MUS Guideline
Promote effective assessment of patient's complaints.
Optimally manage symptoms
Avoid harm (complications and morbidity) including the harm caused by treatment
Achieve satisfaction and positive attitudes regarding the management of chronic unexplained illness
16. 16
17. 17
18. 18 MUS – Sample recommendations Grade A: Strongly recommended
Validate the patient’s thoughts, feelings, and attitudes, educate, reassure the patient, and reinforce the patient-clinician partnership
Emphasize non-drug treatments as well as drug treatments: CBT, graded aerobic exercise, tricyclics for FM
19. 19 MUS – Sample recommendations Grade B: Recommended:
Early intervention may improve prognosis
SSRIs, NSAIDs may have some benefit
Acupuncture, biofeedback, stretching possibly of benefit
20. 20 MUS – Sample recommendations Grade C: “Consider for some”
Relaxation response
Flexibility programs when combined with aerobic exercise
Massage
SSRI
21. 21 MUS – Sample recommendations Recommendations D/E: “Beware”:
Xanax
Antibiotics
Prolonged Bed rest
Corticosteroids
Florinef (alone)
22. 22 Future Vision Through partnerships with other agencies and health systems, develop accelerated process for evidence synthesis and guideline development
Sharpen focus on deployment health issues
Incorporate patient preferences*
Consider newer approaches to assessing evidence and strength of recommendations (GRADE)
Strengthen links between Clinical Practice Guidelines and Performance Metrics
Embed the guidelines and the measurement into clinical work using the EHR