Awareness and agreement with neurofibromatosis care guidelines among U.S. neurofibromatosis specialists

Vanessa L Merker, Pamela Knight, Heather B Radtke, Kaleb Yohay, Nicole J Ullrich, Scott R Plotkin, Justin T Jordan, Vanessa L Merker, Pamela Knight, Heather B Radtke, Kaleb Yohay, Nicole J Ullrich, Scott R Plotkin, Justin T Jordan

Abstract

Introduction: The neurofibromatoses (NF) are a group of rare, genetic diseases sharing a predisposition to develop multiple benign nervous system tumors. Given the wide range of NF symptoms and medical specialties involved in NF care, we sought to evaluate the level of awareness of, and agreement with, published NF clinical guidelines among NF specialists in the United States.

Methods: An anonymous, cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to U.S.-based NF clinicians. Respondents self-reported demographics, practice characteristics, awareness of seven NF guideline publications, and level of agreement with up to 40 individual recommendations using a 5-point Likert scale. We calculated the proportion of recommendations that each clinician rated "strongly agree", and assessed for differences in guideline awareness and agreement by respondent characteristics.

Results: Sixty-three clinicians (49% female; 80% academic practice) across > 8 medical specialties completed the survey. Awareness of each guideline publication ranged from 53%-79% of respondents; specialists had higher awareness of publications endorsed by their medical professional organization (p < 0.05). The proportion of respondents who "strongly agree" with individual recommendations ranged from 17%-83%; for 16 guidelines, less than 50% of respondents "strongly agree". There were no significant differences in overall agreement with recommendations based on clinicians' gender, race, specialty, years in practice, practice type (academic/private practice/other), practice location (urban/suburban/rural), or involvement in NF research (p > 0.05 for all).

Conclusions: We identified wide variability in both awareness of, and agreement with, published NF care guidelines among NF experts. Future quality improvement efforts should focus on evidence-based, consensus-driven methods to update and disseminate guidelines across this multi-specialty group of providers. Patients and caregivers should also be consulted to proactively anticipate barriers to accessing and implementing guideline-driven care. These recommendations for improving guideline knowledge and adoption may also be useful for other rare diseases requiring multi-specialty care coordination.

Keywords: Implementation science; Neurofibromatosis 1; Neurofibromatosis 2; Practice guidelines; Rare diseases; Schwannomatosis.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest pertinent to this manuscript. Financial disclosures for authors include the following: Dr. Merker reports consulting income from the Neurofibromatosis Network. Ms. Knight and Ms. Radtke are employees of the Children’s Tumor Foundation. Dr. Yohay reports consulting income from AstraZeneca and receives royalties from Wolters Kluwer. Dr. Ullrich reports patents held with University of Alabama Research Foundation; royalties from UpToDate; honoraria for speaking with AstraZeneca, and research support from the Children’s Tumor Foundation, Department of Defense and National Institutes of Health. Dr. Plotkin is co-founder of NFlection Therapeutics, Inc. and of NF2 Therapeutics, Inc and a consultant for AstraZeneca and for SonalaSense. Dr. Jordan receives royalties from Elsevier and reports consulting income from Navio Theragnostics, Health2047, and from CereXis.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
NF Clinician Agreement with Neurofibromatosis 1 Recommendations. Stacked bar charts displaying the percentage of clinicians who “strongly agreed” (dark blue), “agreed” (orange), were “neutral” (gray), “disagreed” (yellow), or “strongly disagreed” (light blue) with each recommendation. Overlaid boxes display the percentage of clinicians who “strongly agreed” (dark blue) and “agreed” (orange) with each recommendation, rounded to the nearest percentage point. Recommendations are presented with short descriptions for reference; for full text and citations please refer to Table 1, where all recommendations are presented in the same rank order. CT = computerized tomography; HTN = hypertension; NF = neurofibromatosis; MPNST = malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor; MRA = magnetic resonance angiography; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; WBMRI = whole body magnetic resonance imaging
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
NF Clinician Agreement with Neurofibromatosis 2 and Schwannomatosis Recommendations. Stacked bar charts displaying the percentage of clinicians who “strongly agreed” (dark blue), “agreed” (orange), were “neutral” (gray), “disagreed” (yellow), or “strongly disagreed” (light blue) with each recommendation. Overlaid boxes display the percentage of clinicians who “strongly agreed” (dark blue) and “agreed” (orange) with each recommendation, rounded to the nearest percentage point. Recommendations are presented with short descriptions for reference; for fulltext and citations please refer to Table 1, where all recommendations are presented in the same rank order. NF = neurofibromatosis; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; PTA = pure tone average; WRS = word recognition score. SMARCB1 and LZTR1 refer to gene variants known to cause schwannomatosis

References

    1. Plotkin SR, Wick A. Neurofibromatosis and schwannomatosis. Semin Neurol. 2018;38(1):73–85. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1627471.
    1. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines, Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2011.
    1. Miller DT, Freedenberg D, Schorry E, et al. Health supervision for children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Pediatrics. 2019 doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-0660.
    1. Stewart DR, Korf BR, Nathanson KL, Stevenson DA, Yohay K. Care of adults with neurofibromatosis type 1: a clinical practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) Genet Med. 2018;20(7):671–682. doi: 10.1038/gim.2018.28.
    1. Ferner RE, Huson SM, Thomas N, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of individuals with neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2007;44(2):81–88. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2006.045906.
    1. Evans DG, Baser ME, O'Reilly B, et al. Management of the patient and family with neurofibromatosis 2: a consensus conference statement. Br J Neurosurg. 2005;19(1):5–12. doi: 10.1080/02688690500081206.
    1. Evans DGR, Salvador H, Chang VY, et al. Cancer and central nervous system tumor surveillance in pediatric neurofibromatosis 1. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(12):e46–e53. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0589.
    1. Evans DGR, Salvador H, Chang VY, et al. Cancer and central nervous system tumor surveillance in pediatric neurofibromatosis 2 and related disorders. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(12):e54–e61. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0590.
    1. Bergqvist C, Servy A, Valeyrie-Allanore L, Ferkal S, Combemale P, Wolkenstein P. Neurofibromatosis 1 French national guidelines based on an extensive literature review since 1966. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020 doi: 10.1186/s13023-020-1310-3.
    1. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999;282(15):1458–1465. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.15.1458.
    1. Fischer F, Lange K, Klose K, Greiner W, Kraemer A. Barriers and strategies in guideline implementation—a scoping review. 2016;4(3):36.
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010.
    1. Krosnick JA. Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Appl Cogn Psychol. 1991;5(3):213–236. doi: 10.1002/acp.2350050305.
    1. Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJE, Mistiaen P. Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008;8:38–38. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-38.
    1. Bierbaum M, Rapport F, Arnolda G, et al. Clinicians’ attitudes and perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment clinical practice guideline adherence: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative literature. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-00991-3.
    1. Lapin BR, Honomichl RD, Thompson NR, et al. Association between patient experience with patient-reported outcome measurements and overall satisfaction with care in neurology. Value Health. 2019;22(5):555–563. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.007.
    1. Hanson KT, Zalewski NL, Hocker SE, Caselli RJ, Habermann EB, Thiels CA. At the intersection of patient experience data, outcomes research, and practice: analysis of HCAHPS scores in neurology patients. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2018;2(2):137–147. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2018.03.007.
    1. Indovina K, Keniston A, Reid M, et al. Real-time patient experience surveys of hospitalized medical patients. J Hosp Med. 2016;11(4):251–256. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2533.
    1. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687.
    1. Merker VL, Dai A, Radtke HB, Knight P, Jordan JT, Plotkin SR. Increasing access to specialty care for rare diseases: a case study using a foundation sponsored clinic network for patients with neurofibromatosis 1, neurofibromatosis 2, and schwannomatosis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):668. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3471-5.
    1. Grol R. Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care. 2001;39(8 Suppl 2):II46–54. 10.1097/00005650-200108002-00003.
    1. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(6):iii–iv, 1–72. 10.3310/hta8060.
    1. Montori VM, Brito JP, Murad MH. The optimal practice of evidence-based medicine: incorporating patient preferences in practice guidelines. JAMA. 2013;310(23):2503–2504. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281422.
    1. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010;182(18):E839–E842. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.090449.
    1. Lugtenberg M, Zegers-van Schaick JM, Westert GP, Burgers JS. Why don't physicians adhere to guideline recommendations in practice? An analysis of barriers among Dutch general practitioners. Implement Sci. 2009;4:54. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-54.
    1. Pronovost PJ. Enhancing physicians' use of clinical guidelines. JAMA. 2013;310(23):2501–2502. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281334.
    1. Kim C, Berta WB, Gagliardi A. Exploring approaches to identify, incorporate and report patient preferences in clinical guidelines: Qualitative interviews with guideline developers. Patient Educ Couns. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.001.
    1. Seidlin M, Holzman R, Knight P, et al. Characterization and utilization of an international neurofibromatosis web-based, patient-entered registry: an observational study. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(6):e0178639. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178639.
    1. Chung J, Donelan K, Macklin EA, et al. A randomized controlled trial of an online health tool about Down syndrome. Genet Med. 2021;23(1):163–173. doi: 10.1038/s41436-020-00952-7.
    1. Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM. How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implement Sci. 2011;6(1):26. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-26.
    1. Legius E, Messiaen L, Wolkenstein P, et al. Revised diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 and Legius syndrome: an international consensus recommendation. Genet Med. 2021 doi: 10.1038/s41436-021-01170-5.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe