Logo image
Back
Motivating Factors for Participating in the Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines 2.0
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Motivating Factors for Participating in the Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines 2.0

Grace Wang, Carolina Diniz Hooper, Satheesh Gunaga, Sangil Lee, Wendy C. Coates, Ronna L. Campbell, Elizabeth Goldberg, Fernanda Bellolio, Kei Ouchi, James D. van Oppen, …
Academic emergency medicine, Vol.33(2), e70237
02/01/2026
DOI: 10.1111/acem.70237
PMID: 41673986
url
https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.70237View
Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

Background One in five emergency department (ED) visits is by older adults aged 65+ years. Clinical practice guidelines are needed to optimize patient care by translating the best available evidence into actionable recommendations to guide person-centered management for this medically complex and growing patient population. Our objective was to understand contributors' experiences and share best practices to inform other guideline working groups. Methods We conducted a qualitative study based on thematic analysis with an interpretivist paradigm in June–July 2025, using semi-structured interviews of Geriatric Emergency Department (GED) Guidelines 2.0 contributors to understand their experiences. Interviews were transcribed, independently reviewed by team members, and reflexively coded to identify themes. Results We interviewed 18 participants. Four main themes emerged: (1) motivations for participation, (2) varying opportunities to be involved, (3) personal benefits, and (4) challenges for improvement. Participants contrasted the strengths of shared learning and development with the burdens of organization and coordination. Conclusion Contributors to the GED Guidelines 2.0 reported a positive experience. They joined because they wanted to contribute to better care of older patients and to achieve personal and professional goals. Many cited that their roles aligned with their strengths and expertise. They also gained skills and knowledge on systematic reviews and benefited from networking. Future groups planning a similar process should consider having multiple levels of leadership, experts in systematic reviews, regular reminders, and creative incentives to improve the process and foster improved networking opportunities within their disciplines.
 best practices clinical practice guidelines community of practice geriatric scholarly volunteering

Details

Metrics

1 Record Views
Logo image