No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundEvidence has come to play a central role in health policymaking. However, policymakers tend to use other types of information besides research evidence. Most prior studies on evidence-informed policy have focused on the policy formulation phase without a systematic analysis of its implementation. It has been suggested that in order to fully understand the policy process, the analysis should include both policy formulation and implementation. The purpose of the study was to explore and compare two policies aiming to improve health and social care in Sweden and to empirically test a new conceptual model for evidence-informed policy formulation and implementation.MethodsTwo concurrent national policies were studied during the entire policy process using a longitudinal, comparative case study approach. Data was collected through interviews, observations, and documents. A Conceptual Model for Evidence-Informed Policy Formulation and Implementation was developed based on prior frameworks for evidence-informed policymaking and policy dissemination and implementation. The conceptual model was used to organize and analyze the data.ResultsThe policies differed regarding the use of evidence in the policy formulation and the extent to which the policy formulation and implementation phases overlapped. Similarities between the cases were an emphasis on capacity assessment, modified activities based on the assessment, and a highly active implementation approach relying on networks of stakeholders. The Conceptual Model for Evidence-Informed Policy Formulation and Implementation was empirically useful to organize the data.ConclusionsThe policy actors’ roles and functions were found to have a great influence on the choices of strategies and collaborators in all policy phases. The Conceptual Model for Evidence-Informed Policy Formulation and Implementation was found to be useful. However, it provided insufficient guidance for analyzing actors involved in the policy process, capacity-building strategies, and overlapping policy phases. A revised version of the model that includes these aspects is suggested.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Mental health problems are one of the most pressing public health concerns of our time. Sweden has seen a sharp increase in mental disorders among children and youth during the last decade. The evidence base for treatment of psychiatric conditions has developed strongly. Clinical practice guidelines aim to compile such evidence and support healthcare professionals in evidence‐based clinical decision‐making. In Sweden, the national guidelines for the treatment of depression and anxiety disorders in children and adolescents were launched in 2010. The aim of this study was two folded, (i) to explore to what extent these guidelines were known and adhered to by health professionals in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and (ii) to investigate factors influencing implementation of the guidelines informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Methods A qualitative approach was used, and data were collected through interviews with 18 health professionals in Child Mental Health Services in Sweden and a combination of conventional and directed content analyses was used. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided and structured data collection and analysis. Results The guidelines were largely unknown by health professionals in Child Mental Health Services in all the clinics investigated. Adherence to guideline recommendations was reported as very low. Barriers to implementation were found in relation to the characteristics of the intervention, outer setting, inner setting and characteristics of the individuals involved. Conclusions The government initiative to develop and disseminate the guidelines seems to have made very little impact on health professionals’ clinical practice. The guidelines were poorly aligned with the health professionals’ knowledge and beliefs about effective mental health services for children and youth with depression and anxiety disorders. Suggestions for future efforts to improve the development and implementation of guidelines in Child Mental Health Services settings are given.

BackgroundThe judgment and decision making process during guideline development is central for producing high-quality clinical practice guidelines, but the topic is relatively underexplored in the guideline research literature. We have studied the development process of national guidelines with a disease-prevention scope produced by the National board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) in Sweden. The NBHW formal guideline development model states that guideline recommendations should be based on five decision-criteria: research evidence; curative/preventive effect size, severity of the condition; cost-effectiveness; and ethical considerations. A group of health profession representatives (i.e. a prioritization group) was assigned the task of ranking condition-intervention pairs for guideline recommendations, taking into consideration the multiple decision criteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the decision making process during the two-year development of national guidelines for methods of preventing disease.MethodsA qualitative inductive longitudinal case study approach was used to investigate the decision making process. Questionnaires, non-participant observations of nine two-day group meetings, and documents provided data for the analysis. Conventional and summative qualitative content analysis was used to analyse data.ResultsThe guideline development model was modified ad-hoc as the group encountered three main types of dilemmas: high quality evidence vs. low adoptability of recommendation; insufficient evidence vs. high urgency to act; and incoherence in assessment and prioritization within and between four different lifestyle areas. The formal guideline development model guided the decision-criteria used, but three new or revised criteria were added by the group: ‘clinical knowledge and experience’, ‘potential guideline consequences’ and ‘needs of vulnerable groups’. The frequency of the use of various criteria in discussions varied over time. Gender, professional status, and interpersonal skills were perceived to affect individuals’ relative influence on group discussions.ConclusionsThe study shows that guideline development groups make compromises between rigour and pragmatism. The formal guideline development model incorporated multiple aspects, but offered few details on how the different criteria should be handled. The guideline development model devoted little attention to the role of the decision-model and group-related factors. Guideline development models could benefit from clarifying the role of the group-related factors and non-research evidence, such as clinical experience and ethical considerations, in decision-processes during guideline development.

Aim The aim of this study was to investigate mental health with respect to social‐emotional problems among three‐year‐olds in relation to their gender, custody arrangements and place of residence. Methods A cross‐sectional population‐based design was used, encompassing 7179 three‐year‐olds in northern Sweden during the period 2014–2017 from the regional Salut Register. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed based on parents’ responses on the Ages and Stages Questionnaires: Social‐Emotional, supplemented with items on gender, custody arrangement and place of residence. Results Parental‐reported social‐emotional problems were found in almost 10% of the children. Boys were reported to have more problems (12.3%) than girls (5.6%; p < 0.001). Parents were most concerned about children's eating habits and interactions at mealtimes. Parents not living together reported more problems among their children than those living together (p < 0.001). When stratifying by custody arrangement, girls in rural areas living alternately with each parent had more problems compared to those in urban areas (p < 0.008). Conclusion Gender and custody arrangements appear to be important factors for social‐emotional problems among three‐year‐olds. Thus, such conditions should receive attention during preschool age, preferably by a systematic preventive strategy within Child Health Care.

BackgroundMany of the world’s life threatening diseases (e.g. cancer, heart disease, stroke) could be prevented by eliminating life-style habits such as tobacco use, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and excessive alcohol use. Incorporating evidence-based research on methods to change unhealthy lifestyle habits in clinical practice would be equally valuable. However gaps between guideline development and implementation are well documented, with implications for health care quality, safety and effectiveness. The development phase of guidelines has been shown to be important both for the quality in guideline content and for the success of implementation. There are, however, indications that guidelines related to general disease prevention methods encounter specific barriers compared to guidelines that are diagnosis-specific. In 2011 the Swedish National board for Health and Welfare launched guidelines with a preventive scope. The aim of this study was to investigate how implementation challenges were addressed during the development process of these disease preventive guidelines.MethodsSeven semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the guideline development management group. Archival data detailing the guideline development process were also collected and used in the analysis. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis as the analytical framework.ResultsThe study identified several strategies and approaches that were used to address implementation challenges during guideline development. Four themes emerged from the analysis: broad agreements and consensus about scope and purpose; a formalized and structured development procedure; systematic and active involvement of stakeholders; and openness and transparency in the specific guideline development procedure. Additional factors concerning the scope of prevention and the work environment of guideline developers were perceived to influence the possibilities to address implementation issues.ConclusionsThis case study provides examples of how guideline developers perceive and approach the issue of implementation during the development and early launch of prevention guidelines. Models for guideline development could benefit from an initial assessment of how the guideline topic, its target context and stakeholders will affect the upcoming implementation.

AimThe aim of this study is to investigate factors contributing to the failure of a randomized clinical trial designed to implement and test clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression in primary health care (PHC).BackgroundAlthough the occurrence of depression is increasing globally, many patients with depression do not receive optimal treatment. Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression, which aim to establish evidence-based clinical practice in health care, are often underused and in need of operationalization in and adaptation to clinical praxis. This study explores a failed clinical trial designed to implement and test treatment of depression in PHC in Sweden.MethodQualitative case study methodology was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight participants from the clinical trial researcher group and 11 health care professionals at five PHC units. Additionally, archival data (ie, documents, email correspondence, reports on the clinical trial) from the years 2007–2010 were analysed.FindingsThe study identified barriers to the implementation of the clinical trial in the project characteristics, the medical professionals, the patients, and the social network, as well as in the organizational, economic and political context. The project increased staff workload and created tension as the PHC culture and the research activities clashed (eg, because of the systematic use of questionnaires and changes in scheduling and planning of patient visits). Furthermore, there was a perception that the PHC units’ management did not sufficiently support the project and that the project lacked basic incentives for reaching a sustainable resolution. Despite efforts by the project managers to enhance and support implementation of the innovation, they were unable to overcome these barriers. The study illustrates the complexity and barriers of performing clinical trials in the PHC.