Objective  Evaluate the quality of implementation of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)/Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine (IM) clinical guidelines and expert con-sensus published at home and abroad using the “Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) implementation evaluation tool”, understand the implementation of TCM/IM CPGs and expert consensus, provide a ref-erence for TCM/IM guidelines implementation and promotion. 

Methods  CNKI, Wanfang Data, PubMed, and Medive databases were systematically searched, to collect original TCM/IM guidelines/consensus. The “CPG implementation evaluation tool” was applied to evaluate the implementation of the included TCM/IM guidelines. 

Results  A total of 231 guidelines/consensus were included, consisting of 119 guidelines and 112 expert consensus. In general, the implementation quality of most TCM/IM guide-lines/consensus is low (90.91%). 

Conclusion  The implementation of TCM/TCM CPGs/expert consen-sus still needs to be improved. Incorporating implementation science into the guideline formulation process, managing and guiding formulation from the source, and optimizing the presentation and dis-semination strategies of the guidelines can promote the implementation of guidelines/consensus appli-cation.

1.World Health Organization. Guidelines for methodologies on research and evaluation of traditional medicine[EB/OL]. General: WHO, 2000. (2000) [2022-01-12]. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=B5E0FBC7CA3052D09334E5DB9C7F53E1?doi=10.1.1.384.9417&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

2.World Health Organization. WHO traditional medicine strategy 2002-2005[EB/OL]. General: WHO, 2002. (2012-11-17) [2022-01-12]. https://tailieu.vn/doc/who-traditional-medicine-strategy-2002- 2005-1288033.html.

3.陈耀龙, 罗旭飞, 王吉耀, 等. 如何区分临床实践指南与专家共识[J]. 协和医学杂志, 2019, 10(4): 403-408. [Chen YL, Luo XF, Wang JY, et al. How to distinguish between clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2019, 10(4): 403-408.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081. 2019.04.018.

4.李承羽, 赵晨, 陈耀龙, 等. 中医药临床指南/共识中推荐意见分级标准的制订[J]. 中医杂志, 2020, 61(6): 486-492. [Li CY, Zhao C, Chen YL, et al. Development of grading criteria on recom-mendations in clinical guidelines/consensus for Traditional Chinese Medicine[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 2020, 61(6): 486-492.] DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2020.06.008.

5.陈耀龙, 周奇, 崔荣荣, 等. 基于AGREEⅡ的中医药临床指南质量评价[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2016, 16(11): 1331-1337. [Chen YL, Zhou Q, Cui RR, et al. Quality evaluation of Traditional Chi-nese Medicine guidelines based on AGREE Ⅱ instrument[J]. Chinese Journal of Evi-dence-Based Medicine, 2016, 16(11): 1331-1337.] DOI: 10.7507/1672-2531.20160201.

6.靳英辉, 赵志慧, 黄粲然, 等. 临床实践指南实施性评价工具的研制和验证评价[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2022, 22(1): 111-119. [Jin YH, Zhao ZH, Huang CR, et al. Development and validation for evaluation of an evaluation tool for guideline implementation[J]. Chinese Journal of Evi-dence-Based Medicine, 2022, 22(1): 111-119.] DOI: 10.7507/1672-2531.202106002.

7.李慧, 陈耀龙, 杜亮, 等. 促进循证中医药指南制定的策略与建议：广州宣言[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2016, 16(7): 745-748. [Li H, Chen YL, Du L, et al. Strategies and recommendations to pro-mote the development of evidence-based traditional Chinese medicine guidelines: Guangzhou declaration[J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2016, 16(7): 745-748.] DOI: 10.7507/1672-2531.20160115.

8.赵国桢, 冯硕, 张霄潇, 等. 中医药临床实践指南:现状和思考[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2018, 18(12): 1386-1390. [Zhao GZ, Feng S, Zhang XX, et al. Clinical practice guideline of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM): status and thought[J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medi-cine, 2018, 18(12): 1386-1390.] DOI: 10.7507/1672-2531.201804187.

9.赵国桢, 陈腾飞, 郭玉红, 等. 混合方法研究制定中医药临床实践指南及实例解读[J]. 中国全科医学, 2021, 24(32): 4155-4159. [Zhao GZ, Chen TF, Guo YH, et al. Development of Traditional Chinese Medicine clinical practice guidelines using mixed methods and example inter-pretation[J]. Chinese General Practice, 2021, 24(32): 4155-4159.] DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.01. 215.

10.Kastner M, Bhattacharyya O, Hayden L, et al. Guideline uptake is influenced by six imple-mentability domains for creating and communicating guidelines: a realist review[J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 2015, 68(5): 498-509. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.013.

11.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[J]. Implement Sci, 2020, 15(1): 39. DOI: 10.118 6/s13012-020-00991-3.

12.Hultcrantz M, Rind D, Akl EA, et al. The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence[J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 87: 4-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi. 2017.05.006.

13.Alonso-Coello P, Oxman AD, Moberg J, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frame-works: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: clinical practice guidelines[J]. BMJ, 2016, 353: i2089. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i2089.

14.Sarkies MN, Jones LK, Gidding SS, et al. Improving clinical practice guidelines with imple-mentation science[J]. Nat Rev Cardiol, 2022, 19(1): 3-4. DOI: 10.1038/s41569-021-00645-x.

15.Jin Y, Li Z, Han F, et al. Barriers and enablers for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in China: a mixed-method study[J]. BMJ Open, 2019, 9(9): e026328. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026328.

16.Jin YH, Tan LM, Khan KS, et al. Determinants of successful guideline implementation: a na-tional cross-sectional survey[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2021, 21(1): 19. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-020-01382-w.