Improving prioritization processes for clinical practice guidelines: new methods and an evaluation from the National Heart Foundation of Australia.

BACKGROUND: Releasing timely and relevant clinical guidelines is challenging for organizations globally. Priority-setting is crucial, as guideline development is resource-intensive. Our aim, as a national organization responsible for developing cardiovascular clinical guidelines, was to develop a method for generating and prioritizing topics for future clinical guideline development in areas where guidance was most needed. METHODS: Several novel processes were developed, adopted and evaluated, including (1) initial public consultation for health professionals and the general public to generate topics; (2) thematic and qualitative analysis, according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), to aggregate topics; (3) adapting a criteria-based matrix tool to prioritize topics; (4) achieving consensus through a modified-nominal group technique and voting on priorities; and (5) process evaluation via survey of end-users. The latter comprised the organization's Expert Committee of 12 members with expertise across cardiology and public health, including two citizen representatives. RESULTS: Topics (n = 405; reduced to n = 278 when duplicates removed) were identified from public consultation responses (n = 107 respondents). Thematic analysis synthesized 127 topics that were then categorized into 37 themes using ICD-11 codes. Exclusion criteria were applied (n = 32 themes omitted), resulting in five short-listed topics: (1) congenital heart disease, (2) valvular heart disease, (3) hypercholesterolaemia, (4) hypertension and (5) ischaemic heart diseases and diseases of the coronary artery. The Expert Committee applied the prioritization matrix to all five short-listed topics during a consensus meeting and voted to prioritize topics. Unanimous consensus was reached for the topic voted the highest priority: ischaemic heart disease and diseases of the coronary arteries, resulting in the decision to update the organization's 2016 clinical guidelines for acute coronary syndromes. Evaluation indicated that initial public consultation was highly valued by the Expert Committee, and the matrix tool was easy to use and improved transparency in priority-setting. CONCLUSION: Developing a multistage, systematic process, incorporating public consultation and an international classification system led to improved transparency in our clinical guideline priority-setting processes and that topics chosen would have the greatest impact on health outcomes. These methods are potentially applicable to other national and international organizations responsible for developing clinical guidelines.

Development and Use of a Cardiac Clinical Guideline Mobile App in Australia: Acceptability and Multi-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of clinical guidelines into routine practice remains highly variable. Strategies to increase guideline uptake include developing digital tools and mobile apps for use in clinical practice. The National Heart Foundation of Australia in collaboration with the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand published 3 key cardiac clinical guidelines, including the Australian clinical guidelines for the (1) prevention and detection of atrial fibrillation, (2) detection and management of heart failure, and (3) management of acute coronary syndromes. To improve access and uptake for health care providers, we developed the Smart Heart Guideline App. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the acceptability, implementation, and usability of an Australian-specific cardiac guidelines mobile app. METHODS: We used an iterative multiple methods development and implementation approach. First, we conducted a cross-sectional web-based survey with end users (n=504 health professionals) in 2017 to determine the acceptability of an Australian-specific cardiac clinical guidelines mobile app. Second, the Smart Heart Guidelines app was created using a design, user testing, and revision process. The app includes interactive algorithms and flowcharts to inform diagnosis and management at the point of care. The freely available app was launched in October 2019 on iOS and Android operating systems and promoted and implemented using multiple methods. Third, data from 2 annual national cross-sectional general practitioner (GP) surveys in 2019 and 2020 were evaluated to understand the awareness and use of the clinical guidelines and the app. Fourth, data from the app stores were analyzed between October 1, 2019, and June 30, 2021, to evaluate usage. RESULTS: Most health professionals surveyed (447/504, 89%) reported accessing resources electronically, and most (318/504, 63%) reported that they would use an Australian-specific cardiac guidelines app. GPs surveyed in 2019 were aware of the heart failure (159/312, 51%) and atrial fibrillation (140/312, 45%) guidelines, and in 2020, a total of 34 of 189 (18%) reported that they were aware of the app. The app was downloaded 11,313 times (7483, 66% from the Apple App Store; 3830, 34% from Google Play) during the first 20-month period. Most downloads (6300/7483, 84%) were a result of searching for the app in the stores. Monthly download rates varied. App Store data showed that people used the app twice (on average 2.06 times) during the 20 months. Many (3256/3830, 85%) Android users deleted the app. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals supported the development of the Smart Heart Guidelines app. Although initial downloads were promising, the frequency of using the app was low and deletion rates were high. Further evaluation of users' experience of the most and least useful components of the app is needed.