Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age: Summary of a Holistic and Multidisciplinary Approach.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age initiative aims to redesign and improve guideline development, implementation, and standardization. Historically, aspects of guideline development and implementation have been siloed. This leads to long lag times for guidelines to reach patient care, unnecessary redundancy, and potential for misinterpretation, leading to inconsistencies in how the recommendations are applied. A multidisciplinary, multiorganizational holistic approach brought together experts in guideline development, informatics, communication, implementation, and evaluation to understand and identify problems in guideline development and implementation, define an ideal state with no constraints, and then design a future state that advances the process close to the ideal state. The Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age workgroups each worked on one focus area and included experts from the other areas to help analyze the current state and develop holistic solutions for the future state. Each workgroup produced interrelated standards, processes, and tools that can be used across the continuum of guideline development and implementation.

An Integrated Process for Co-Developing and Implementing Written and Computable Clinical Practice Guidelines.

The goal of this article is to describe an integrated parallel process for the co-development of written and computable clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to accelerate adoption and increase the impact of guideline recommendations in clinical practice. From February 2018 through December 2021, interdisciplinary work groups were formed after an initial Kaizen event and using expert consensus and available literature, produced a 12-phase integrated process (IP). The IP includes activities, resources, and iterative feedback loops for developing, implementing, disseminating, communicating, and evaluating CPGs. The IP incorporates guideline standards and informatics practices and clarifies how informaticians, implementers, health communicators, evaluators, and clinicians can help guideline developers throughout the development and implementation cycle to effectively co-develop written and computable guidelines. More efficient processes are essential to create actionable CPGs, disseminate and communicate recommendations to clinical end users, and evaluate CPG performance. Pilot testing is underway to determine how this IP expedites the implementation of CPGs into clinical practice and improves guideline uptake and health outcomes.

An Evaluation Framework for a Novel Process to Codevelop Written and Computable Guidelines.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) support individual and population health by translating new, evidence-based knowledge into recommendations for health practice. CPGs can be provided as computable, machine-readable guidelines that support the translation of recommendations into shareable, interoperable clinical decision support and other digital tools (eg, quality measures, case reports, care plans). Interdisciplinary collaboration among guideline developers and health information technology experts can facilitate the translation of written guidelines into computable ones. The benefits of interdisciplinary work include a focus on the needs of end-users who apply guidelines in practice through clinic decision support systems as part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age (ACG) initiative, a group of interdisciplinary experts proposed a process to facilitate the codevelopment of written and computable CPGs, referred to as the "integrated process (IP)."1 This paper presents a framework for evaluating the IP based on a combination of vetted evaluation models and expert opinions. This framework combines 3 types of evaluations: process, product, and outcomes. These evaluations assess the value of interdisciplinary expert collaboration in carrying out the IP, the quality, usefulness, timeliness, and acceptance of the guideline, and the guideline's health impact, respectively. A case study is presented that illustrates application of the framework.

Adapted Kaizen: Multi-Organizational Complex Process Redesign for Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age.

The need for a method to examine complex, multidisciplinary processes involving many diverse organizations initially led multiple US federal agencies to adopt the traditional Kaizen, a Lean process improvement method typically used within a single organization, to encompass multiple organizations each with its own leadership and priorities. First, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology adapted Kaizen to federal agency processes for the development of electronic clinical quality measures. Later, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) further modified this adapted Kaizen during its Adapting Clinical Guidelines for the Digital Age (ACG) initiative, which aimed to improve the broader scope of guideline development and implementation. This is a methods article to document the adapted Kaizen method for future use in similar complex processes, illustrating how to apply the adapted Kaizen through CDC's ACG initiative and showing the reach achieved by using the adapted Kaizen method. The adapted Kaizen includes pre-Kaizen planning, a Kaizen event, and post-Kaizen implementation that accommodate multidisciplinary and multi-organizational participation. ACG included 5 workgroups that each developed products to support their respective scope: Guideline Creation, Informatics Framework, Translation and Implementation, Communication and Dissemination, and Evaluation. Despite challenges gathering diverse perspectives and balancing the competing priorities of multiple organizations, the ACG participants produced interrelated standards, processes, and tools-further described in separate publications-that programs and partners have leveraged. Use of a siloed approach may not have supported the development and dissemination of these products.

Creating implementable clinical practice guidelines: the 2020 Focused Updates to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Asthma Management Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group provides the first new clinical practice recommendations from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) since the previous 2007 asthma management guidelines. Guideline implementability was a high priority for the expert panel, and many approaches were undertaken to enhance the implementability of this clinical guideline update. Within the report, specific implementation guidance sections provide expanded summaries for each recommendation to quickly assist users. The implementation guidance incorporates findings from NHLBI-sponsored focus groups conducted with people who have asthma, caregivers, and health care providers. The findings were used to identify the types of information and tools that individuals with asthma, their caregivers, and their health care providers would find most helpful; ensure that the new asthma guidelines reflect the voices of individuals with asthma and their caregivers; and identify potential barriers to uptake by individuals with asthma and their caregivers. The expert panel used a GRADE-based approach to develop evidence-to-decision tables that provided a framework for assessing the evidence and consideration of a range of contextual factors that influenced the recommendations such as desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, values, balance of effects, acceptability, feasibility, and equity. To facilitate uptake in clinical care workflow, selected recommendations were converted into structured, computer-based clinical decision support artifacts, and the new recommendations were integrated into existing treatment tables used in the 2007 asthma management guidelines, with which many users are familiar. A comprehensive approach to improve guidelines dissemination and implementation included scientific publications, patient materials, media activities, stakeholder engagement, and professional education. CONCLUSION: We developed evidence-based clinical practice guideline updates for asthma management focused on six topic areas. The guideline development processes and implementation and dissemination activities undertaken sought to enhance implementability by focusing on intrinsic factors as described by Kastner, Gagliardi, and others to produce usable, adoptable, and adaptable guidelines. Enhanced collaboration during guideline development between authors, informaticists, and implementation scientists may facilitate the development of tools that support the application of recommendations to further improve implementability.

Strategies for developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to foster implementation into dental practice.

BACKGROUND: Professional and other organizations, including oral health care organizations, have been developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to help providers incorporate the best available evidence into their clinical decision making. Although the rigor of guideline development has increased over time, ongoing challenges prevent the full adoption of CPGs into clinical practices that experience variability in provider expertise and opinion, patient flow pace, and use of electronic dental records. These challenges include lack of relevant evidence, failure to keep guidelines up to date, and failure to adopt strategies aimed at overcoming the barriers preventing implementation into clinical practice. RESULTS: This article provides a brief overview of strategies that can be used to overcome common challenges to guideline adoption. Such strategies include creating evidence-based CPGs that use additional sources of evidence and methods to inform guideline development and accelerate the guideline updating and dissemination process (that is, evidence directly from clinical practice, big data, patients' values and preferences, and living guidelines) and applying implementation strategies that have been documented as improving translation of CPGs into routine clinical practice (that is, guideline implementability, implementation science, and computable guidelines). PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Adopting newer strategies for developing and translating evidence into practice could lead to improvements in patient care and population health.

Computable Guidelines and Clinical Decision Support for Cervical Cancer Screening and Management to Improve Outcomes and Health Equity.

Cervical cancer is highly preventable when precancerous lesions are detected early and appropriately managed. However, the complexity of and frequent updates to existing evidence-based clinical guidelines make it challenging for clinicians to stay abreast of the latest recommendations. In addition, limited availability and accessibility to information technology (IT) decision supports make it difficult for groups who are medically underserved to receive screening or receive the appropriate follow-up care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC), is leading a multiyear initiative to develop computer-interpretable ("computable") version of already existing evidence-based guidelines to support clinician awareness and adoption of the most up-to-date cervical cancer screening and management guidelines. DCPC is collaborating with the MITRE Corporation, leading scientists from the National Cancer Institute, and other CDC subject matter experts to translate existing narrative guidelines into computable format and develop clinical decision support tools for integration into health IT systems such as electronic health records with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes and decreasing disparities in cervical cancer outcomes among populations that are medically underserved. This initiative meets the challenges and opportunities highlighted by the President's Cancer Panel and the President's Cancer Moonshot 2.0 to nearly eliminate cervical cancer.

Blueprint for aligned data exchange for research and public health.

Making EHR Data More Available for Research and Public Health (MedMorph) is a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-led initiative developing and demonstrating a reference architecture (RA) and implementation, including Health Level Seven International Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (HL7 FHIR) implementation guides (IGs), describing how to leverage FHIR for aligned research and public health access to clinical data for automated data exchange. MedMorph engaged a technical expert panel of more than 100 members to model representative use cases, develop IGs (architectural and content), align with existing efforts in the FHIR community, and demonstrate the RA in research and public health uses. The RA IG documents common workflows needed to automatically send research data to Research Patient Data Repositories for multiple use cases. Sharing a common RA and canonical data model will improve data sharing for research and public health needs and generate evidence. MedMorph delivers a robust, reusable method to utilize data from electronic health records addressing multiple research and public health needs.

To Share is Human! Advancing Evidence into Practice through a National Repository of Interoperable Clinical Decision Support.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems devote substantial resources to the development of clinical decision support (CDS) largely independently. The process of translating evidence-based practice into useful and effective CDS may be more efficient and less duplicative if healthcare systems shared knowledge about the translation, including workflow considerations, key assumptions made during the translation process, and technical details. OBJECTIVE: Describe how a national repository of CDS can serve as a public resource for healthcare systems, academic researchers, and informaticists seeking to share and reuse CDS knowledge resources or "artifacts." METHODS: In 2016, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) launched CDS Connect as a public, web-based platform for authoring and sharing CDS knowledge artifacts. Researchers evaluated early use and impact of the platform by collecting user experiences of AHRQ-sponsored and community-led dissemination efforts and through quantitative/qualitative analysis of site metrics. Efforts are ongoing to quantify efficiencies gained by healthcare systems that leverage shared, interoperable CDS artifacts rather than developing similar CDS de novo and in isolation. RESULTS: Federal agencies, academic institutions, and others have contributed over 50 entries to CDS Connect for sharing and dissemination. Analysis indicates shareable CDS resources reduce team sizes and the number of tasks and time required to design, develop, and deploy CDS. However, the platform needs further optimization to address sociotechnical challenges. Benefits of sharing include inspiring others to undertake similar CDS projects, identifying external collaborators, and improving CDS artifacts as a result of feedback. Organizations are adapting content available through the platform for continued research, innovation, and local implementations. CONCLUSION: CDS Connect has provided a functional platform where CDS developers are actively sharing their work. CDS sharing may lead to improved implementation efficiency through numerous pathways, and further research is ongoing to quantify efficiencies gained.

Delayed glucose treatment improves cognitive function following fluid-percussion injury.

Experimental traumatic brain injury (TBI) results in marked neurochemical and metabolic changes. Research has demonstrated that after the initial insult the brain undergoes an immediate state of hypermetabolism followed by a sustained period of hypometabolism. The altered extra- and intracellular environment can compromise neuronal performance and limit functional recovery. If brain metabolism is depressed chronically after TBI, then interventions that are designed to increase metabolism may be beneficial to outcome. Glucose treatment has been shown to improve cognition in many populations, particularly those with cognitive deficits. The following experiments examined the effects of delayed postinjury glucose supplementation on cognitive function following TBI. Male Sprague-Dawley rats received either sham or lateral fluid-percussion (LFP) injury. Cognitive functioning was assessed with the Morris water maze (MWM) on postinjury days 11-15. In the first experiment, saline or 100mg/kg glucose was administered 10 min before cognition assessment. Injured animals treated with glucose displayed significantly shorter latencies to reach the goal platform compared to injured saline-treated animals. Glucose had no effect on sham-injured rats. In the second experiment, injured rats were given daily injections of saline or 100mg/kg glucose for 10 days beginning 24h after injury. Rats were then tested in the MWM on days 11-15 without glucose or saline treatment. In this experiment, glucose treatment did not affect MWM performance. These data provide evidence that the chronic energy supplementation after TBI improves outcome when administered shortly before cognitive assessment.