1 / 29

From Evidence to EMS Practice: Building the National Model

From Evidence to EMS Practice: Building the National Model. Eddy Lang, MD, CFPC (EM), CSPQ SMBD-Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Montreal, Canada. Overview. Research evidence versus consensus/expert based CPGs Avoiding GOBSAT methodology Unique EMS aspects to consider

thor-schroeder
Download Presentation

From Evidence to EMS Practice: Building the National Model

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. From Evidence to EMS Practice: Building the National Model Eddy Lang, MD, CFPC (EM), CSPQ SMBD-Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Montreal, Canada

  2. Overview • Research evidence versus consensus/expert based CPGs • Avoiding GOBSAT methodology • Unique EMS aspects to consider • A broader perspective about CPGs • Other aspects that can influence this CPG project

  3. Clinical practice guidelines Systematically developed statements or recommendations to assist practitioner about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances. Institute of Medicine (1992). Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use.

  4. The promise of guidelines • Evidence Synthesis • Reduced variation in care • Guidance • Improved patient outcomes • Improved system efficiency • Benchmarks

  5. The pitfalls of guidelines • Biased • Overwhelming • Confusing • Directionless • Driven only by evidence • Not implemented

  6. Options Questions Search Selection Appraisal Strength of evidence Combining studies Effect size Primary Domains of CPG Development Evidence Mastery

  7. Primary Domains of CPG Development Evidence Mastery Context Risk/benefits Values Preferences

  8. Graded Recommendations

  9. Reliable Clear Valid Implementable Graded Recommendations Transparent Credible Unbiased

  10. What makes a great CPG? • What domains are important? • What criteria within each domain? • Can a rigorously developed appraisal tool inform?

  11. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation

  12. AGREE instrument • Generic tool designed primarily to help guideline developers • Developed by international collaborative group including 16 partners from 12 countries (including Canada, New Zealand, US) • Reliability and some aspects of validity assessed • Users guide available • Translated into most European languages (including French)

  13. AGREE STRUCTURE Six domains – 23 items 1. Scope & purpose (3) 2. Stakeholder involvement (4) 3. Rigour of development (7) 4. Clarity & presentation (4) 5. Applicability (3) 6. Editorial independence (2)

  14. DOMAIN 1.SCOPE AND PURPOSE 1. The overall objective(s) of the guideline is(are) specifically described. 2. The clinical question(s) covered by the guideline is(are) specifically described. 3. The patients to whom the guideline is meant to apply are specifically described.

  15. DOMAIN 2.STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT 4. The guideline development group includes individuals from all the relevant professional groups. 5. The patients’ views and preferences have been sought. 6. The target users of the guideline are clearly defined. 7. The guideline has been piloted among target users.

  16. DOMAIN 3.RIGOUR OF DEVELOPMENT (1) 8. Systematic methods were used to search for evidence. 9. The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described. 10. The methods used for formulating the recommendations are clearly described. 11. The health benefits, side effects and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations.

  17. DOMAIN 3.RIGOUR OF DEVELOPMENT (2) 12. There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence. 13. The guideline has been externally reviewed by an expert panel prior to publication. 14. A procedure for updating the guideline is provided.

  18. DOMAIN 4.CLARITY AND PRESENTATION 15. The recommendations are specific and unambiguous. 16. The different options for management of the condition are clearly presented. 17. Key recommendations are easily identifiable. 18. The guideline is supported with tools for application.

  19. DOMAIN 5.APPLICABILITY 19. The potential organisational barriers in applying the guideline have been discussed. 20. The potential costs implications of applying the recommendations have been considered. 21. The guideline presents key review criteria for monitoring and/or audit purposes.

  20. DOMAIN 6.EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE 22. The guideline is editorially independent from the funding body. 23. Conflicts of interest of guideline development members have been recorded.

  21. A Whirlwind Tour of the CPG World

  22. Guideline International Network

  23. ADAPTE

  24. Very few EMS-specific CPGs

  25. Many existing CPGs address EMS

  26. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation

  27. Closing thoughts • Exciting times in CPG development • Much accumulated wisdom • Many challenges to meet • Unprecedented opportunity to improve EMS patient care

  28. Thank you!

More Related