Healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer guidelines in Europe: a systematic literature review

Purpose: Clinical guidelines' (CGs) adherence supports high-quality care. However, healthcare providers do not always comply with CGs recommendations. This systematic literature review aims to assess the extent of healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer CGs in Europe and to identi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Niño de Guzman, Ena, Song, Yang, Alonso-Coello, Pablo, Canelo-Aybar, Carlos, Neamtiu, Luciana, Parmelli, Elena, Perez-Bracchiglione, Javier, Rabassa, Montserrat, Rigau, David, Parkinson, Zuleika Saz, Sola, Ivan, Vasquez-Mejia, Adrian, Ricci-Cabello, Ignacio
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2020
País:España
Institución:Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII)
Repositorio:Repisalud
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:repisalud.isciii.es:20.500.12105/23037
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/23037
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Breast neoplasms
Guidelines as topic
Evidence-based medicine
Guideline adherence
Systematic review
Atención a la Salud
Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto
Humanos
Calidad de la Atención de Salud
Femenino
Personal de Salud
Neoplasias de la Mama
Adhesión a Directriz
Breast Neoplasms
Quality of Health Care
Health Personnel
Female
Humans
Guideline Adherence
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Delivery of Health Care
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose: Clinical guidelines' (CGs) adherence supports high-quality care. However, healthcare providers do not always comply with CGs recommendations. This systematic literature review aims to assess the extent of healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer CGs in Europe and to identify the factors that impact on healthcare providers' adherence. Methods: We searched for systematic reviews and quantitative or qualitative primary studies in MEDLINE and Embase up to May 2019. The eligibility assessment, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by one author and cross-checked by a second author. We conducted a narrative synthesis attending to the modality of the healthcare process, methods to measure adherence, the scope of the CGs, and population characteristics. Results: Out of 8137 references, we included 41 primary studies conducted in eight European countries. Most followed a retrospective cohort design (19/41; 46%) and were at low or moderate risk of bias. Adherence for overall breast cancer care process (from diagnosis to follow-up) ranged from 54 to 69%; for overall treatment process [including surgery, chemotherapy (CT), endocrine therapy (ET), and radiotherapy (RT)] the median adherence was 57.5% (interquartile range (IQR) 38.8-67.3%), while for systemic therapy (CT and ET) it was 76% (IQR 68-77%). The median adherence for the processes assessed individually was higher, ranging from 74% (IQR 10-80%), for the follow-up, to 90% (IQR 87-92.5%) for ET. Internal factors that potentially impact on healthcare providers' adherence were their perceptions, preferences, lack of knowledge, or intentional decisions. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of breast cancer patients are not receiving CGs-recommended care. Healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer CGs in Europe has room for improvement in almost all care processes. CGs development and implementation processes should address the main factors that influence healthcare providers' adherence, especially patient-related ones. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018092884).