Kian Torabiardakani, Shraddha Sawant, Gonzalo Bravo-Soto, Daniela Montalva-Romero, Rachel J Couban, Abigail E Chu, Norman Buckley, Gordon Guyatt, David Juurlink, Jason W Busse, Andrea J Darzi
LSG appears feasible, safe, and effective in patients with SIT when supported by careful preoperative imaging, planning, and minor technical modifications. SIT-related anatomical variation does not appear to adversely affect outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Healthcare guidelines are necessary to optimise patient care and improve health outcomes; however, guidelines alone are insufficient to ensure changes in practice. This overview of reviews aims to identify, map and report on the effectiveness of knowledge translation (KT) strategies to implement guideline recommendations.
METHODS: We will conduct this study in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook guidance on overviews of reviews. We will search MEDLINE, CRD, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Health Systems Evidence, Epistemonikos, CINAHL and Embase. Eligible studies will include systematic reviews evaluating KT interventions for guideline implementation, regardless of the healthcare condition or system level. Teams of reviewers will independently screen and extract data on systematic review characteristics, interventions, outcomes (process-, healthcare professional-, patient- and economic-related and other), contextual factors and review limitations. The same reviewers will assess risk of bias among included reviews using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2). We will synthesise the evidence by classifying intervention effectiveness into the following categories: (1) desirable effect, (2) little or no effect, (3) undesirable effect and (4) uncertain effect, along with the certainty of evidence, if reported. We will present our findings through a narrative synthesis, tabular formats, and an evidence gap map to visualise the evidence landscape.
DISCUSSION: This overview of reviews will provide a summary of KT strategies and their effectiveness for improving guideline implementation. These findings will offer actionable guidance for key interest-holders: investigators can utilise the evidence gap map to identify research priorities; guideline developers can identify effective strategies for increasing uptake of recommendations; and funders can optimise resource allocation by directing support towards evidence-based dissemination strategies.