Exploring the use and impact of the Australian living guidelines for the clinical care of people with COVID-19: where to from here?

OBJECTIVES: The Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce has been developing, maintaining, and disseminating living guidelines and decision support tools (clinical flowcharts) for the care of people with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 since 2020. Living guidelines, a form of living evidence, are a relatively new approach; hence, more work is required to determine how to optimize their use to inform practice, policy, and decision-making and to explore implementation, uptake, and impact implications. An update of an earlier impact evaluation was conducted to understand sustained awareness and use of the guidelines; the factors that facilitate the widespread adoption of the guidelines and to explore the perceived strengths and opportunities for improvement of the guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A mixed-methods impact evaluation was conducted. Surveys collected both quantitative and qualitative data and were supplemented with qualitative interviews. Participants included Australian healthcare practitioners providing care to individuals with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and people involved in policy-making. Data were collected on awareness, use, impact, strengths, and opportunities for improvement of the guidelines and flow charts. RESULTS: A total of 148 participants completed the survey and 21 people were interviewed between January and March 2022. Awareness of the work of the Taskforce was high and more than 75% of participants reported that the guidelines were used within their workplace. Participants described the Taskforce website and guidelines as trustworthy, valuable, and reliable sources of up-to-date evidence-based information. The evaluation highlighted the varied ways the guidelines were being used across a range of settings and the diverse impacts they have from those at a clinical level to impacts at a policy level. Barriers to and enablers of impact and uptake of the guideline were explored. CONCLUSION: This evaluation highlights the value of living guidelines during a pandemic when the evidence base is rapidly changing and expanding. It presents useful understanding of the ways clinicians and others use living evidence to inform their clinical practice and decision-making and the diverse impacts the guidelines are having around Australia.

Care of older people and people requiring palliative care with COVID-19: guidance from the Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce.

INTRODUCTION: Older people living with frailty and/or cognitive impairment who have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience higher rates of critical illness. There are also people who become critically ill with COVID-19 for whom a decision is made to take a palliative approach to their care. The need for clinical guidance in these two populations resulted in the formation of the Care of Older People and Palliative Care Panel of the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce in June 2020. This specialist panel consists of nursing, medical, pharmacy and allied health experts in geriatrics and palliative care from across Australia. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: The panel was tasked with developing two clinical flow charts for the management of people with COVID-19 who are i) older and living with frailty and/or cognitive impairment, and ii) receiving palliative care for COVID-19 or other underlying illnesses. The flow charts focus on goals of care, communication, medication management, escalation of care, active disease-directed care, and managing symptoms such as delirium, anxiety, agitation, breathlessness or cough. The Taskforce also developed living guideline recommendations for the care of adults with COVID-19, including a commentary to discuss special considerations when caring for older people and those requiring palliative care. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS RESULT OF THE GUIDELINE: The practice points in the flow charts emphasise quality clinical care, with a focus on addressing the most important challenges when caring for older individuals and people with COVID-19 requiring palliative care. The adult recommendations contain additional considerations for the care of older people and those requiring palliative care.

Awareness, value and use of the Australian living guidelines for the clinical care of people with COVID-19: an impact evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce is developing living, evidence-based, national guidelines for treatment of people with COVID-19. These living guidelines are updated each week. We undertook an impact evaluation to understand the extent to which health professionals providing treatment to people with COVID 19 were aware of, valued and used the guidelines, and the factors that enabled or hampered this. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used for the evaluation. Surveys were conducted to collect both quantitative and qualitative data and were supplemented with qualitative interviews. Australian healthcare practitioners potentially providing care to individuals with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were invited to participate. Data were collected on guideline awareness, relevance, ease of use, trustworthiness, value, importance of updating, use, and strengths and opportunities for improvement. RESULTS: A total of 287 people completed the surveys and 10 interviews were conducted during November 2020. Awareness of the work of the Taskforce was high and the vast majority of respondents reported that the guidelines were very or extremely relevant, easy to use, trustworthy and valuable. More than 50% of respondents had used the guidelines to support their own clinical decision-making; and 30% were aware of other examples of the guidelines being used. Qualitative data revealed that amongst an overwhelming morass of evidence and opinions during the COVID-19 pandemic, the guidelines have been a reliable, united source of evidence-based advice; participants felt the guidelines built confidence and provided reassurance in clinical decision-making. Opportunities to improve awareness and accessibility to the guidelines were also explored. CONCLUSIONS: As of June 2021, the guidelines have been published and updated more than 40 times, include more than 140 recommendations and are being used to inform clinical decisions. The findings of this impact evaluation will be used to improve processes and outputs of the Taskforce and guidelines project, and to inform future living guideline projects.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter protein-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes at varying cardiovascular and renal risk. DESIGN: Network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL up to 11 August 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials comparing SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists with placebo, standard care, or other glucose lowering treatment in adults with type 2 diabetes with follow up of 24 weeks or longer. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequentist random effects network meta-analysis was carried out and GRADE (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation) used to assess evidence certainty. Results included estimated absolute effects of treatment per 1000 patients treated for five years for patients at very low risk (no cardiovascular risk factors), low risk (three or more cardiovascular risk factors), moderate risk (cardiovascular disease), high risk (chronic kidney disease), and very high risk (cardiovascular disease and kidney disease). A guideline panel provided oversight of the systematic review. RESULTS: 764 trials including 421 346 patients proved eligible. All results refer to the addition of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists to existing diabetes treatment. Both classes of drugs lowered all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and kidney failure (high certainty evidence). Notable differences were found between the two agents: SGLT-2 inhibitors reduced admission to hospital for heart failure more than GLP-1 receptor agonists, and GLP-1 receptor agonists reduced non-fatal stroke more than SGLT-2 inhibitors (which appeared to have no effect). SGLT-2 inhibitors caused genital infection (high certainty), whereas GLP-1 receptor agonists might cause severe gastrointestinal events (low certainty). Low certainty evidence suggested that SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists might lower body weight. Little or no evidence was found for the effect of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists on limb amputation, blindness, eye disease, neuropathic pain, or health related quality of life. The absolute benefits of these drugs vary substantially across patients from low to very high risk of cardiovascular and renal outcomes (eg, SGLT-2 inhibitors resulted in 3 to 40 fewer deaths in 1000 patients over five years; see interactive decision support tool (https://magicevidence.org/match-it/200820dist/#!/) for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes, SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists reduced cardiovascular and renal outcomes, with some differences in benefits and harms. Absolute benefits are determined by individual risk profiles of patients, with clear implications for clinical practice, as reflected in the BMJ Rapid Recommendations directly informed by this systematic review. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019153180.

Weekly updates of national living evidence-based guidelines: methods for the Australian living guidelines for care of people with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce is a consortium of 31 Australian health professional organisations developing living, evidence-based guidelines for care of people with COVID-19, which are updated weekly. This article describes the methods used to develop and maintain the guidelines. METHODS: The guidelines use the GRADE methods and are designed to meet Australian NHMRC standards. Each week, new evidence is reviewed, current recommendations are revised, and new recommendations made. These are published in MAGIC and disseminated through traditional and social media. Relevant new questions to be addressed are continually sought from stakeholders and practitioners. For prioritized questions, the evidence is actively monitored and updated. Evidence surveillance combines horizon scans and targeted searches. An evidence team appraises and synthesizes evidence and prepares evidence-to-decision frameworks to inform development of recommendations. A guidelines leadership group oversees the development of recommendations by multidisciplinary guidelines panels and is advised by a consumer panel. RESULTS: The Taskforce formed in March 2020, and the first recommendations were published 2 weeks later. The guidelines have been revised and republished on a weekly basis for 24 weeks, and as of October 2020, contain over 90 treatment recommendations, suggesting that living methods are feasible in this context. CONCLUSIONS: The Australian guidelines for care of people with COVID-19 provide an example of the feasibility of living guidelines and an opportunity to test and improve living evidence methods.

Clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19: Living recommendations from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce.

To date, 18 living recommendations for the clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 have been issued by the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. This includes recommendations on mode of birth, delayed umbilical cord clamping, skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding, rooming-in, antenatal corticosteroids, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, disease-modifying treatments (including dexamethasone, remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and advanced respiratory support interventions (prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Through continuous evidence surveillance, these living recommendations are updated in near real-time to ensure clinicians in Australia have reliable, evidence-based guidelines for clinical decision-making. Please visit https://covid19evidence.net.au/ for the latest recommendation updates.

Feasibility and acceptability of living systematic reviews: results from a mixed-methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Living systematic reviews (LSRs) offer an approach to keeping high-quality evidence synthesis continually up to date, so the most recent, relevant and reliable evidence can be used to inform policy and practice, resulting in improved quality of care and patient health outcomes. However, they require modifications to authoring and editorial processes and pose technical and publishing challenges. Several teams within Cochrane and the international Living Evidence Network have been piloting living systematic reviews. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation with participants involved in six LSRs (three Cochrane and three non-Cochrane). Up to three semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 participants involved with one or more of the pilot LSRs. Interviews explored participants' experiences contributing to the LSR, barriers and facilitators to their conduct and opportunities for future development. Pilot team members also completed monthly surveys capturing time for key tasks and the number of citations screened for each review. RESULTS: Across the pilot LSRs, search frequency was monthly to three-monthly, with some using tools such as machine learning and Cochrane Crowd to screen searches. Varied approaches were used to communicate updates to readers. The number of citations screened varied widely between the reviews, from three to 300 citations per month. The amount of time spent per month by the author team on each review also varied from 5 min to 32 h. Participants were enthusiastic to be involved in the LSR pilot. They highlighted the importance of a motivated and well-organised team; the value of technology enablers to improve workflow efficiencies; the need to establish reliable and efficient processes to sustain living reviews; and the potential for saving time and effort in the long run. Participants highlighted challenges with the current publication processes, managing ongoing workload and the lack of resources to support LSRs in the long term. CONCLUSIONS: Findings to date support feasibility and acceptability of LSR production. There are challenges that need to be addressed for living systematic reviews to be sustainable and have maximum value. The findings from this study will be used in discussions with the Cochrane community, key decision makers and people more broadly concerned with LSRs to identify and develop priorities for scale-up.

Recruiting people with HIV to an online self-management support randomised controlled trial: barriers and facilitators.

Background Recruitment of people to randomised trials of online interventions presents particular challenges and opportunities. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with the recruitment of people with HIV (PWHIV) and their doctors to the HealthMap trial, a cluster randomised trial of an online self-management program. METHODS: Recruitment involved a three-step process. Study sites were recruited, followed by doctors caring for PWHIV at study sites and finally PWHIV. Data were collected from study sites, doctors and patient participants. Factors associated with site enrolment and patient participant recruitment were investigated using regression models. RESULTS: Thirteen study sites, 63 doctor participants and 728 patient participants were recruited to the study. Doctors having a prior relationship with the study investigators (odds ratio (OR) 13.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0, 58.7; P = 0.001) was positively associated with becoming a HealthMap site. Most patient participants successfully recruited to HealthMap (80%) had heard about the study from their HIV doctor. Patient enrolment was associated with the number of people with HIV receiving care at the site (ß coefficient 0.10; 95% CI 0.04, 0.16; P = 0.004), but not with employing a clinic or research nurse to help recruit patients (ß coefficient 55.9; 95% CI -2.55, 114.25; P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Despite substantial investment in online promotion, a previous relationship with doctors was important for doctor recruitment, and doctors themselves were the most important source of patient recruitment to the HealthMap trial. Clinic-based recruitment strategies remain a critical component of trial recruitment, despite expanding opportunities to engage with online communities.

The systematic development of a complex intervention: HealthMap, an online self-management support program for people with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Despite persistent calls for HIV care to adopt a chronic care approach, few HIV treatment services have been able to establish service arrangements that prioritise self-management. To prevent cardiovascular and other chronic disease outcomes, the HealthMap program aims to enhance routine HIV care with opportunities for self-management support. This paper outlines the systematic process that was used to design and develop the HealthMap program, prior to its evaluation in a cluster-randomised trial. METHODS: Program development, planning and evaluation was informed by the PRECEDE-PROCOEDE Model and an Intervention Mapping approach and involved four steps: (1) a multifaceted needs assessment; (2) the identification of intervention priorities; (3) exploration and identification of the antecedents and reinforcing factors required to initiate and sustain desired change of risk behaviours; and finally (4) the development of intervention goals, strategies and methods and integrating them into a comprehensive description of the intervention components. RESULTS: The logic model incorporated the program's guiding principles, program elements, hypothesised causal processes, and intended program outcomes. Grounding the development of HealthMap on a clear conceptual base, informed by the research literature and stakeholder's perspectives, has ensured that the HealthMap program is targeted, relevant, provides transparency, and enables effective program evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a systematic process for intervention development facilitated the development of an intervention that is patient centred, accessible, and focuses on the key determinants of health-related outcomes for people with HIV in Australia. The techniques used here may offer a useful methodology for those involved in the development and implementation of complex interventions.

HealthMap: a cluster randomised trial of interactive health plans and self-management support to prevent coronary heart disease in people with HIV.

BACKGROUND: The leading causes of morbidity and mortality for people in high-income countries living with HIV are now non-AIDS malignancies, cardiovascular disease and other non-communicable diseases associated with ageing. This protocol describes the trial of HealthMap, a model of care for people with HIV (PWHIV) that includes use of an interactive shared health record and self-management support. The aims of the HealthMap trial are to evaluate engagement of PWHIV and healthcare providers with the model, and its effectiveness for reducing coronary heart disease risk, enhancing self-management, and improving mental health and quality of life of PWHIV. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a two-arm cluster randomised trial involving HIV clinical sites in several states in Australia. Doctors will be randomised to the HealthMap model (immediate arm) or to proceed with usual care (deferred arm). People with HIV whose doctors are randomised to the immediate arm receive 1) new opportunities to discuss their health status and goals with their HIV doctor using a HealthMap shared health record; 2) access to their own health record from home; 3) access to health coaching delivered by telephone and online; and 4) access to a peer moderated online group chat programme. Data will be collected from participating PWHIV (n = 710) at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months and from participating doctors (n = 60) at baseline and 12 months. The control arm will be offered the HealthMap intervention at the end of the trial. The primary study outcomes, measured at 12 months, are 1) 10-year risk of non-fatal acute myocardial infarction or coronary heart disease death as estimated by a Framingham Heart Study risk equation; and 2) Positive and Active Engagement in Life Scale from the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ). DISCUSSION: The study will determine the viability and utility of a novel technology-supported model of care for maintaining the health and wellbeing of people with HIV. If shown to be effective, the HealthMap model may provide a generalisable, scalable and sustainable system for supporting the care needs of people with HIV, addressing issues of equity of access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Universal Trial Number (UTN) U111111506489; ClinicalTrial.gov Id NCT02178930 submitted 29 June 2014.

The Positive Outlook Study: A Randomised Controlled Trial Evaluating Online Self-Management for HIV Positive Gay Men.

The aim of this paper was to evaluate the effectiveness of an online self-management program in improving health outcomes and well-being for gay men living with HIV in Australia. The online Positive Outlook Program was based on self-efficacy theory and used a self-management approach to enhance HIV-positive gay men's skills, confidence and abilities to manage the psychosocial issues associated with HIV in daily life. The 7-week program was delivered in closed groups and comprised information modules, action-planning activities, moderated discussion boards, and weekly peer-facilitated 'live chats'. A randomised controlled trial was conducted to establish the effectiveness of the Positive Outlook program compared to a 'usual care' control. Participants were HIV-positive gay men 18 years or older living in Australia. Primary outcomes were evaluated at three time-points (baseline, post-intervention and 12-week's post-intervention follow-up) and included HIV-related quality of life (PROQOL-HIV), outcomes of health education (HeiQ) and HIV specific self-efficacy (Positive Outlook Self-Efficacy Scale). A total of 132 gay men with HIV in Australia were randomly allocated to the intervention (n = 68) or usual care control (n = 64) groups. Maximum likelihood marginal-linear modelling indicated significant improvement in the intervention group on the PROQOL-HIV subscales of body change (p = 0.036), social relationships (p = 0.035) and emotional distress (p = 0.031); the HeiQ subscales of health-directed activity (p = 0.048); constructive attitudes and approaches (p = 0.015); skill and technique acquisition (p = 0.046) and health service navigation (p = 0.008); and the Positive Outlook Self-Efficacy Scale on the subscales of relationships (p = 0.019); social participation (p = 0.006); and emotions (p = 0.041). Online delivery of self-management programs is feasible and has the potential to improve quality of life, self-management skills and domain specific self-efficacy for gay men with HIV.

Online self-management for gay men living with HIV: a pilot study.

UNLABELLED: Background The aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of Positive Outlook, an online self-management program for gay men living with HIV in Australia. METHODS: Two pilot studies were conducted, a small feasibility study (Pilot 1) followed by a pilot randomised controlled study (Pilot 2). Pilot 1 employed a pre and post-test design and included 10 men. Within- and between-group differences were evaluated in Pilot 2, which involved 37 participants randomly assigned to receive the Positive Outlook Program or usual care. We report on feasibility, acceptability and a range of preliminary efficacy outcomes, including health education impact, HIV-related quality of life and HIV-related self-efficacy. RESULTS: The program was well accepted by participants with some decline in engagement with the discussion boards witnessed over the duration of the program. Overall, intervention group participants demonstrated improvements in the majority of efficacy outcome measures, including HIV-related quality of life, self-efficacy, self-management skills, social support and adjustment to HIV. CONCLUSION: These pilot studies demonstrated that an online program to facilitate self-management among gay men living with HIV is both feasible and well accepted by participants who persisted with the program per protocol. Preliminary data suggest that the Positive Outlook program has the potential to enhance participants' quality of life, self-efficacy and health related outcomes, and demonstrates the need for further study with a larger sample.

Informing the development of an online self-management program for men living with HIV: a needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this mixed methods study was to conduct a multifaceted needs assessment to inform the development of an online self-management program for men living with HIV. The objectives were to describe the health-related quality of life for men living with HIV, the impact of living with HIV, and the perceived problem areas and service and support needs of these men. The needs assessment was conducted in accordance with the PRECEDE model for health promotion program planning. METHODS: A survey assessing the quality of life of men living with HIV (n = 72) was conducted and results were compared to Australian normative data. Focus groups were also undertaken with men living with HIV (n = 11) and a multidisciplinary team of service providers working in the area of HIV (n = 11). Focus groups enabled an in-depth description of the impact of HIV on quality of life and perceived problem areas in daily life. RESULTS: HIV-positive men experience significantly lower quality of life when compared with Australian normative data, particularly in those domains concerned with social and emotional aspects of quality of life. Qualitative focus groups yielded an overarching theme 'The psychosocial impact of HIV' which contained three sub-themes; (1) Life before and after HIV--a changed identity and its repercussions; (2) Resilience and the importance of social support; (3) Negotiating the practicalities--intimate relationships and disclosure. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this needs assessment highlight the need to target socio-emotional contexts of HIV positive men's daily lives to improve quality of life and well-being. Intervention priorities for the proposed online self-management program include: (1) managing the emotional impact of HIV; (2) disclosing HIV status to family and friends; (3) maintaining social connectedness; (4) managing HIV within intimate relationships; and (5) disclosure of HIV status to intimate partners.

The positive outlook study- a randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of an online self-management program targeting psychosocial issues for men living with HIV: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of HIV as a chronic condition means that people living with HIV are required to take more responsibility for the self-management of their condition, including making physical, emotional and social adjustments. This paper describes the design and evaluation of Positive Outlook, an online program aiming to enhance the self-management skills of gay men living with HIV. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is designed as a randomised controlled trial in which men living with HIV in Australia will be assigned to either an intervention group or usual care control group. The intervention group will participate in the online group program 'Positive Outlook'. The program is based on self-efficacy theory and uses a self-management approach to enhance skills, confidence and abilities to manage the psychosocial issues associated with HIV in daily life. Participants will access the program for a minimum of 90 minutes per week over seven weeks. Primary outcomes are domain specific self-efficacy, HIV related quality of life, and outcomes of health education. Secondary outcomes include: depression, anxiety and stress; general health and quality of life; adjustment to HIV; and social support. Data collection will take place at baseline, completion of the intervention (or eight weeks post randomisation) and at 12 week follow-up. DISCUSSION: Results of the Positive Outlook study will provide information regarding the effectiveness of online group programs improving health related outcomes for men living with HIV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12612000642886.

Self-management education programs for people living with HIV/AIDS: a systematic review.

The effectiveness of self-management programs to improve physical, psychosocial, health knowledge, and behavioral outcomes for adults living with HIV has not been well established. This article reviews the effectiveness of self-management education programs to improve physical, psychosocial, health knowledge, and behavior outcomes for adults living with HIV/AIDS. A systematic review of English articles using CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO were used to identify and retrieve relevant studies. Each database was searched from its earliest record to October 2010. Search terms included HIV/AIDS, self-management, self-care, patient education, and education programs. Only studies that (1) reported on a HIV-specific intervention that aimed to increase participants HIV-related knowledge through a self-management component, (2) included a control group, (3) provided skills training or targeted behavior change, and (4) reported clinical outcomes were included. Independent data extraction by one author using the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. A second reviewer checked the data extraction. Six protocols were reported in eight publications (n=1178), all contained elements of self-management interventions. Effect size calculations were not conducted due to limitations in the available data. The review found randomized controlled trials (RCT) evidence sufficient to infer that self-management programs for people living with HIV/AIDS result in short-term improvements in physical, psychosocial, and health knowledge and behavioral outcomes. Statistically significant improvements were reported for intervention participants compared to control participants across most outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to provide conclusions regarding the long-term outcomes of HIV-specific self-management interventions.