SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Study protocol: A cross-sectional survey of clinicians to identify barriers to clinical practice guideline implementation in the assessment and treatment of persistent tic disorders.

PLoS One · 2023-07-19

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288408PMID: 37467237

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

IntroductionEight members of the International Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders Society Tic and Tourette Syndrome Study Group formed a subcommittee to discuss further barriers to practice guideline implementation. Based on expert opinion and literature review, the consensus was that practice variations continue to be quite broad and that many barriers in different clinical settings might negatively influence the adoption of the American Academy of Neurology and the European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome published guidelines.Objectives1) To identify how clinical practices diverge from the existing American Academy of Neurology and European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome guidelines, and 2) to identify categories of barriers leading to these clinical care gaps.Methods and analysisThis article presents the methodology of a planned cross-sectional survey amongst healthcare professionals routinely involved in the clinical care of patients with persistent tic disorders, aimed at 1) identifying how practices diverge from the published guidelines; and 2) identifying categories of barriers leading to these clinical care gaps. Purposeful sampling methods are used to identify and recruit critical persistent tic disorders stakeholders. The analysis will use descriptive statistics.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.