Use, applicability, and dissemination of patient versions of clinical practice guidelines in oncology in Germany: a qualitative interview study with healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: People with cancer have high information needs; however, they are often inadequately met. Patient versions of clinical practice guidelines (PVGs), a special form of evidence-based information, translate patient-relevant recommendations from clinical practice guidelines into lay language. To date, little is known about the experience of PVGs from healthcare providers' perspective in healthcare. This study aims to investigate the use, applicability, and dissemination of PVGs in oncology from the healthcare providers' perspective in Germany. METHODS: Twenty semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with oncological healthcare providers in Germany between October and December 2021. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Mayring's qualitative content analysis with MAXQDA software was utilised to analyse the data. RESULTS: A total of 20 healthcare providers (14 female, 6 male), mainly working as psychotherapists/psycho-oncologists and physicians, participated. Most participants (75%) were aware of the existence of PVGs. The content was predominantly perceived as comprehensible and relevant, whereas opinions on the design and format were mixed. The perceived lack of up-to-date information limited participants' trust in the content. Most felt that PVGs positively impact healthcare owing to the fact that they improve patients' knowledge about their disease. Additionally, PVGs served as a guide and helped healthcare providers structure physician-patient talks. Healthcare provider's unawareness of the existence of PVGs was cited as an obstructive factor to its dissemination to patients. CONCLUSION: Limited knowledge of the existence of PVGs among healthcare providers, coupled with alternative patient information, hinders the use and dissemination of PVGs in healthcare. However, the applicability of PVGs seemed to be acceptable owing to their content and good comprehensibility, especially with respect to physician-patient communication.

Barriers and facilitators in developing patient versions of clinical practice guidelines - qualitative interviews on experiences of international guideline producers.

BACKGROUND: Several guideline organizations produce patient versions of clinical practice guidelines (PVGs) which translate recommendations into simple language. A former study of our working group revealed that few guideline organizations publish their methods used to develop PVGs. Clear definitions of PVGs do not prevail and their purposes often remain unclear. We aimed to explore experts' perspectives on developing, disseminating and implementing PVGs to discuss and incorporate these experiences when consenting on methodological guidance and further improving PVGs. METHODS: We conducted 17 semi-structured telephone interviews with international experts working with PVGs from September 2021 through January 2022. We conducted the interviews in English or German, they were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We utilized Mayring's qualitative content analysis with MAXQDA software to analyze the data. RESULTS: In two interviews two participants were interviewed at the same time. This resulted in a total of 19 participants from 16 different organizations and eight different countries participated. Most were female (16/19) and their experience in working with PVGs ranged from 1 to 20 years. All follow methodological standards when developing PVGs, but the extent of these standards and their public accessibility differs. Aims and target groups of PVGs vary between organizations. Facilitators for developing PVGs are working with a multidisciplinary team, financial resources, consultation processes and a high-quality underlying CPG. Facilitators for disseminating and implementing PVGs are using various strategies. Barriers, on the other hand, are the lack of these factors. All participants mentioned patient involvement as a key aspect in PVG development. CONCLUSION: The steps in the PVG development process are largely similar across the countries. Focus is placed on the involvement of patients in the development process, although the extent of participation varies. The experts collectively attribute great importance to PVGs overall, but in order to constantly adapt to medical progress and changing conditions, the focus in the future may be more on formats like living guidelines. Although there are different views on the mandatory development of PVGs, there is a consistent call for more transparency regarding the methodology used for PVGs.

Heterogeneous methodology in the development of patient versions of clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to gain an overview of the methods and approaches used to develop, disseminate, and implement patient versions of clinical practice guidelines (PVGs). METHODS: We searched PubMed and MEDLINE through Ovid for articles reporting on the development, dissemination, or implementation of PVGs until March 2022. We searched the homepages of guideline organizations, screened the reference lists of the included documents, and asked experts to complement the publications. We narratively synthesized the findings. RESULTS: Of 3,941 publications screened, 27 were included in the study. The identified method reports focused on patient involvement and peer-review processes. The other included publications highlighted the relevance of broad dissemination strategies and emphasized the importance of patient involvement and improving the readability of PVGs by using lay terms and shorter sentences. CONCLUSION: The terminology used for PVGs varies widely. The extent to which the methods were described was heterogeneous. Organizations developing PVGs should make their methods publicly available and use uniform labeling for PVGs in English to improve their use and recognition, not only for other PVG producers but also for patients and the public. A consensus regarding a minimum reporting standard for developing PVGs internationally and developing guiding principles is desirable.

Invisible population: Understanding recruitment barriers of a nurse-led support programme for families with caregiving children in Austria.

Aims: To evaluate why no families could be recruited for a nurse-led and family-centred support programme in Austria which aimed to prevent an age-inappropriate caring role for young carers. Design: A qualitative study incorporating qualitative e-interviews and telephone interviews. Method: Twenty-one interviews were conducted with statistically significant project stakeholders (N = 17) and with adult family members of children with caring responsibilities (N = 4). Data collection and analysis were guided by the "Social Marketing Framework." Relevant statements were assigned to the main categories: product; price; promotion; place; and working with partners. Results: The lack of awareness towards young carers, the unfamiliar, open outcome approach of the intervention, the inappropriate language used in promotional materials and the families' fear of stigma while seeking support were identified as central obstacles for successful recruitment of families and implementation of the support programme.

Being we and being me: Exploring the needs of Austrian families with caring children.

Children and adolescents with caring responsibilities are an uncontested reality in our society. Most are hidden from public view, and they perform a broad range of caring activities for chronically ill or disabled family members. The research literature has accumulated a comprehensive body of knowledge about young carers' personal needs. However, knowledge and understanding are limited regarding the needs of young carers' families. This knowledge can contribute to preventing children and adolescents from assuming inappropriate caring roles. A qualitative research approach was used to investigate the needs of young carers' families in terms of managing daily caring demands. Nine family interviews were conducted with 34 individuals including 15 young carers during spring/summer 2015 in eastern Austria. Open and axial coding procedures and constant comparison method were used to analyse the data. The findings revealed that young carers' families need to live in accordance with their inherent family logic. Family logic is generated and maintained via (i) family reciprocity that involves the natural help within the family, (ii) individual developmental space that allows family members to be perceived and act as individuals and (iii) network cooperation that offers formal and informal support and recognition from society in general. The findings contribute to understanding how families with caring children manage the caring demands of their everyday lives. The findings also indicate that formal support for families with young carers should consider the individuality of caring arrangements with respect to the holistic and personal needs and avoid stigmatising families that integrate children into caring.