RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Prior studies indicate the effectiveness of measurement-based care (MBC), an evidence-based practice, in improving and accelerating positive outcomes for youth receiving behavioral health services. MBC is the routine collection and use of client-reported progress measures to inform shared decision-making and collaborative treatment adjustments and is a relatively feasible and scalable clinical practice, particularly well-suited for under-resourced community mental health settings. However, uptake of MBC remains low, so information on determinants related to MBC practice patterns is needed. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative data from N = 80 clinicians who implemented MBC using a measurement feedback system (MFS) were merged to understand and describe determinants of practice over three study phases. Quantitative, latent class analysis identified clinician groups based on participants' ratings of MFS acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility and describes similarities/differences between classes in clinician-level characteristics (e.g., age; perceptions of implementation climate; reported MFS use; phase I). Qualitative analyses of clinicians' responses to open-ended questions about their MFS use and feedback about the MFS and implementation supports were conducted separately to understand multi-level barriers and facilitators to MFS implementation (phase II). Mixing occurred during interpretation, examining clinician experiences and opinions across groups to understand the needs of different classes of clinicians, describe class differences, and inform selection of implementation strategies in future research (phase III). RESULTS: We identified two classes of clinicians: "Higher MFS" and "Lower MFS," and found similarities and differences in MFS use across groups. Compared to Lower MFS participants, clinicians in the Higher MFS group reported facilitators at a higher rate. Four determinants of practice were associated with the uptake of MBC and MFS in youth-serving community mental health settings for all clinicians: clarity, appropriateness, and feasibility of the MFS and its measures; clinician knowledge and skills; client preferences and behaviors; and incentives and resources (e.g., time; continuing educational support). Findings also highlighted the need for individual-level implementation strategies to target clinician needs, skills, and perceptions for future MBC and MFS implementation efforts. CONCLUSION: This study has implications for the adoption of evidence-based practices, such as MBC, in the context of community-based mental health services for youth.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers are a complex healthcare issue. Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers are used as proxy measurements for the quality and safety of nursing care. Medical device-related pressure ulcers are mostly facility acquired, but their reporting has only recently been widely adopted. Consequently, we do not yet know what factors impact their reporting by registered nurses. OBJECTIVES: To identify and systematically report determinants of the practice of medical device-related pressure ulcers reporting using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases checklist. DESIGN: Descriptive, explorative design using semi-structured interviews to explore barriers and facilitators to reporting medical device-related pressure ulcers. SETTING: We undertook online, telephone, and face-to-face interviews with participants from 11 different countries. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 17 participants who represented acute care (Adult, Paediatrics), academia, and industry. Eleven participants were healthcare professionals with more than 10 years' experience in wound care. METHODS: The interview recordings were transcribed and coded by the lead researcher. Data were analysed thematically using the codebook approach, and themes were developed inductively and deductively. RESULTS: Participants identified determinants of practice which clustered around four domains of the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases checklist i) individual health professional factors, ii) professional interactions, iii) incentives and resources, and iv) capacity for organisational change. Knowledge, attitudes, workload, time, staffing, and perception of consequences, including financial, were identified as the main barriers to reporting. Factors supporting the practice were education, openness, and teamwork. Device procurement could take on characteristics of a barrier or facilitator depending on the organisation. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting medical device-related pressure ulcers has been adopted in healthcare institutions worldwide. Understanding what drives the reporting practice enables improvements in incident reporting, which consequently can lead to improvements in the quality of nursing care and patient safety.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Tailoring implementation strategies to local contexts is a promising approach to supporting implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices in health settings. While there is increasing research on tailored implementation of mental health interventions, implementation research on suicide prevention interventions is limited. This study aimed to evaluate implementation and subsequently develop a tailored action plan to support sustainment of an evidence-based suicide prevention intervention; Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) in an Australian public mental health service. Methods: Approximately 150 mental health staff working within a regional and remote Local Health District in Australia were trained in CAMS. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with frontline staff and clinical leaders were conducted to examine barriers and facilitators to using CAMS. Data were analysed using a reflexive thematic analysis approach and mapped to the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework and followed by stakeholder engagement to design a tailored implementation action plan based on a 'tailored blueprint' methodology. Results: A total of 22 barriers to implementing CAMS were identified. Based on the perceived impact on implementation fidelity and the feasibility of addressing identified barriers, six barriers were prioritised for addressing through an implementation action plan. These barriers were mapped to evidence-based implementation strategies and, in collaboration with local health district staff, goals and actionable steps for each strategy were generated. This information was combined into a tailored implementation plan to support the sustainable use of CAMS as part of routine care within this mental health service. Conclusions: This study provides an example of a collaborative approach to tailoring strategies for implementation on a large scale. Novel insights were obtained into the challenges of evaluating the implementation process and barriers to implementing an evidence-based suicide prevention treatment approach within a geographically large and varied mental health service in Australia. Plain language abstract: This study outlines the process of using a collaborative stakeholder engagement approach to develop tailored implementation plans. Using the Exploration Preparation Implementation Sustainment Framework, findings identify the barriers to and strategies for implementing a clinical suicide prevention intervention in an Australian community mental health setting. This is the first known study to use an implementation science framework to investigate the implementation of the clinical suicide prevention intervention (Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality) within a community mental health setting. This work highlights the challenges of conducting implementation research in a dynamic public health service.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Evidence-based practice is fundamental to providing quality care, patient satisfaction and judicious use of limited healthcare resources. However, variability in evidence-based eye care delivery has been reported. Given the important role of optometrists in delivering primary eye care, a better understanding of the barriers and facilitators to providing optometric care is required. This systematic review aimed to identify determinants (barriers and facilitators) of eye care delivery by optometrists and interventions that may improve eye care delivery. RECENT FINDINGS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PsychINFO, ProQuest and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting barriers and facilitators to eye care delivery published between 1999 and 2020. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to analyse data (quotations, interpretive summaries, survey result) with barriers and facilitators coded to one or more of the 14 domains, and used to identify the key behavioural domains influencing eye care delivery based on frequency of coding, elaboration and stated importance in the study. Influential domains were mapped to the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify potential interventions to improve eye care delivery. Of the 802 studies retrieved from the search, 30 were included. Frequently identified barriers were time constraints, resources and equipment issues, patient factors, lack of awareness, skill proficiency deficits and negative attitudes and beliefs. Frequently identified facilitators were adequate time, resources and equipment, education, skill proficiency and understanding the relevancy of the eye care provided. The key TDF domains influencing eye care delivery were 'environmental context and resources' (time, resources, equipment issues, patient factors), 'knowledge' (awareness issues), 'skills' (skills proficiency) and 'belief about consequences' (beliefs and relevancy). Intervention functions that may improve eye care delivery were education, training, restriction, environmental restructuring, enablement, persuasion and modelling. SUMMARY: The barriers and facilitators identified in this review were diverse and located at both the practitioner and organisational levels. Four TDF domains were found to be influential determinants of eye care practice. Intervention functions identified in this study can be used to improve the appropriateness of primary eye care delivery.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several frameworks have been developed to identify essential determinants for healthcare improvement. These frameworks aim to be comprehensive, leading to the creation of long lists of determinants that are not prioritised based on being experienced as most important. Furthermore, most existing frameworks do not describe the methods or actions used to identify and address the determinants, limiting their practical value. The aim of this study is to describe the development of a tool with prioritised facilitators and barriers supplemented with methods to identify and address each determinant. The tool can be used by those performing quality improvement initiatives in healthcare practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods study design was used to develop the tool. First, an online survey was used to ask healthcare professionals about the determinants they experienced as most facilitating and most hindering during the performance of their quality improvement initiative. A priority score was calculated for every named determinant, and those with a priority score ≥ 20 were incorporated into the tool. Semi-structured interviews with implementation experts were performed to gain insight on how to analyse and address the determinants in our tool. RESULTS: The 25 healthcare professionals in this study experienced 64 facilitators and 66 barriers when performing their improvement initiatives. Of these, 12 facilitators and nine barriers were incorporated into the tool. Sufficient support from management of the department was identified as the most important facilitator, while having limited time to perform the initiative was considered the most important barrier. The interviews with 16 experts in implementation science led to various inputs for identifying and addressing each determinant. Important themes included maintaining adequate communication with stakeholders, keeping the initiative at a manageable size, learning by doing and being able to influence determinants. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the development of a tool with prioritised determinants for performing quality improvement initiatives with suggestions for analysing and addressing these determinants. The tool is developed for those engaged in quality improvement initiatives in practice, so in this way it helps in bridging the research to practice gap of determinants frameworks. More research is needed to validate and develop the tool further.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Internet-based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (iCBT) is found effective in treating common mental disorders. However, the use of these interventions in routine care is limited. The international ImpleMentAll study is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 programme. It is concerned with studying and improving methods for implementing evidence-based iCBT services for common mental disorders in routine mental health care. A digitally accessible implementation toolkit (ItFits-toolkit) will be introduced to mental health care organizations with the aim to facilitate the ongoing implementation of iCBT services within local contexts. This study investigates the effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit by comparing it to implementation-as-usual activities. METHODS: A stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (SWT) design will be applied. Over a trial period of 30 months, the ItFits-toolkit will be introduced sequentially in twelve routine mental health care organizations in primary and specialist care across nine countries in Europe and Australia. Repeated measures are applied to assess change over time in the outcome variables. The effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit will be assessed in terms of the degree of normalization of the use of the iCBT services. Several exploratory outcomes including uptake of the iCBT services will be measured to feed the interpretation of the primary outcome. Data will be collected via a centralized data collection system and analysed using generalized linear mixed modelling. A qualitative process evaluation of routine implementation activities and the use of the ItFits-toolkit will be conducted within this study. DISCUSSION: The ImpleMentAll study is a large-scale international research project designed to study the effectiveness of tailored implementation. Using a SWT design that allows to examine change over time, this study will investigate the effect of tailored implementation on the normalization of the use of iCBT services and their uptake. It will provide a better understanding of the process and methods of tailoring implementation strategies. If found effective, the ItFits-toolkit will be made accessible for mental health care service providers, to help them overcome their context-specific implementation challenges. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883 . Retrospectively registered on 29 August 2018.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A key early step to enhance the integration of community pharmacy services (CPSs) into primary care practice is identifying key determinants of practice (i.e., critical circumstances that influence the implementation of such services). Involving relevant stakeholders in identifying key determinants enables findings to be more relevant to the context in which CPSs will be implemented. OBJECTIVE: To identify key determinants of practice that can influence the implementation of government-funded CPSs in a primary health network in Australia. METHODS: A stakeholder collaborative approach was used, encompassing two phases. In the first phase, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ground-level stakeholders in Western Sydney between August 2016 to October 2016. Framework analysis was used to code and analyse the data from the interviews into determinants of pharmacy practice. In the second phase, a workshop was conducted with a mixed-group of ground-level and system-level stakeholders from the primary health network to identify key determinants. A four-quadrant prioritization matrix was employed in the workshop to classify determinants based on their importance and feasibility. RESULTS: Sixty-five determinants of practice that can influence CPS implementation were identified in Phase 1. These determinants were allocated at different levels of the healthcare system, and can exist as a barrier or facilitator or both. Twenty-two key determinants were selected in Phase 2, of which three were agreed to be addressed initially: (1) Patient understanding of the aims of the service; (2) Commitment of the organization and its leaders to provide services; (3) Coordination of the healthcare system to prompt collaboration between pharmacists and GPs. CONCLUSIONS: This collaborative stakeholder approach identified a set of key determinants of pharmacy practice in this Australian primary care setting. To enhance the implementation of CPSs in this region, initial efforts should be aimed at developing implementation strategies based on these key determinants of practice.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The integration of community pharmacy services (CPSs) into primary care practice can be enhanced by assessing (and further addressing) the elements that enable (ie, facilitators) or hinder (ie, barriers) the implementation of such CPSs. These elements have been widely researched from the perspective of pharmacists but not from the perspectives of other stakeholders who can interact with and influence the implementation of CPSs. The aim of this study was to synthesise the literature on patients', general practitioners' (GPs) and nurses' perspectives of CPSs to identify barriers and facilitators to their implementation in Australia. METHODS: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies was performed. A systematic search in PubMed, Scopus and Informit was conducted to identify studies that explored patients', GPs' or nurses' views about CPSs in Australia. Thematic synthesis was performed to identify elements influencing CPS implementation, which were further classified using an ecological approach. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were included in the review, addressing 63 elements influencing CPS implementation. Elements were identified as a barrier, facilitator or both and were related to four ecological levels: individual patient (n=14), interpersonal (n=24), organisational (n=16) and community and healthcare system (n=9). It was found that patients, nurses and GPs identified elements reported in previous pharmacist-informed studies, such as pharmacist's training/education or financial remuneration, but also new elements, such as patients' capability to follow service's procedures, the relationships between GP and pharmacy professional bodies or the availability of multidisciplinary training/education. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, GPs and nurses can describe a large number of elements influencing CPS implementation. These elements can be combined with previous findings in pharmacists-informed studies to produce a comprehensive framework to assess barriers and facilitators to CPS implementation. This framework can be used by pharmacy service planners and policy makers to improve the analysis of the contexts in which CPSs are implemented.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Intervention Mapping is a planning protocol for developing behavior change interventions, the first three steps of which are intended to establish the foundations and rationales of such interventions. AIM: This systematic review aimed to identify programs that used Intervention Mapping to plan changes in health care professional practice. Specifically, it provides an analysis of the information provided by the programs in the first three steps of the protocol to determine their foundations and rationales of change. METHOD: A literature search was undertaken in PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, and DOAJ using "Intervention Mapping" as keyword. Key information was gathered, including theories used, determinants of practice, research methodologies, theory-based methods, and practical applications. RESULTS: Seventeen programs aimed at changing a range of health care practices were included. The social cognitive theory and the theory of planned behavior were the most frequently used frameworks in driving change within health care practices. Programs used a large variety of research methodologies to identify determinants of practice. Specific theory-based methods (e.g., modelling and active learning) and practical applications (e.g., health care professional training and facilitation) were reported to inform the development of practice change interventions and programs. DISCUSSION: In practice, Intervention Mapping delineates a three-step systematic, theory- and evidence-driven process for establishing the theoretical foundations and rationales underpinning change in health care professional practice. CONCLUSION: The use of Intervention Mapping can provide health care planners with useful guidelines for the theoretical development of practice change interventions and programs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although there is evidence that tailored implementation strategies can be effective, there is little evidence on which methods of tailoring improve the effect. We designed and evaluated five tailored programs (TPs) each consisting of various strategies. The aim of this study was to examine (a) how determinants of practice prioritized in the design phase of the TPs were perceived by health care professionals who had been exposed to the TPs and whether they suggested other important determinants of practice and (b) how professionals used the offered strategies and whether they suggested other strategies that might have been more effective. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-method process evaluation linked to five cluster-randomized trials carried out in five European countries to implement recommendations for five chronic conditions in primary care settings. The five TPs used a total of 28 strategies which aimed to address 38 determinants of practice. Interviews of professionals in the intervention groups and a survey of professionals in the intervention and control groups were performed. Data collection was conducted by each research team in the respective national language. The interview data were first analyzed inductively by each research team, and subsequently, a meta-synthesis was conducted. The survey was analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: We conducted 71 interviews; 125 professionals completed the survey. The survey showed that 76 % (n = 29) of targeted determinants of practice were perceived as relevant and 95 % (n = 36) as being modified by the implementation interventions by 66 to 100 % of professionals. On average, 47 % of professionals reported using the strategies and 51 % considered them helpful, albeit with substantial variance between countries and strategies. In the interviews, 89 determinants of practice were identified, of which 70 % (n = 62) had been identified and 45 % (n = 40) had been prioritized in the design phase. The interviewees suggested 65 additional strategies, of which 54 % (n = 35) had been identified and 20 % (n = 13) had been prioritized, but not selected in the final programs. CONCLUSIONS: This study largely confirmed the perceived relevance of the targeted determinants of practice. This contrasts with the fact that no impact of the trials on the implementation of the recommendations could be observed. The findings suggest that better methods for prioritization of determinants and strategies are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Each of the five trials was registered separately in recognized trial registries. Details are given in the respective trial outcome papers.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To improve adherence to evidence-based recommendations, it is logical to identify determinants of practice and tailor interventions to address these. We have previously prioritised six recommendations to improve treatment of elderly patients with depression, and identified determinants of adherence to these recommendations. The aim of this article is to describe how we tailored interventions to address the determinants for the implementation of the recommendations. METHODS: We drafted an intervention plan, based on the determinants we had identified in a previous study. We conducted six group interviews with representatives of health professionals (GPs and nurses), implementation researchers, quality improvement officers, professional and voluntary organisations and relatives of elderly patients with depression. We informed about the gap between evidence and practice for elderly patients with depression and presented the prioritised determinants that applied to each recommendation. Participants brainstormed individually and then in groups, suggesting interventions to address the determinants. We then presented evidence on the effectiveness of strategies for implementing depression guidelines. We asked the groups to prioritise the suggested interventions considering the perceived impact of determinants and of interventions, the research evidence underlying the interventions, feasibility and cost. We audiotaped and transcribed the interviews and applied a five step framework for our analysis. We created a logic model with links between the determinants, the interventions, and the targeted improvements in adherence. RESULTS: Six groups with 29 individuals provided 379 suggestions for interventions. Most suggestions could be fit within the drafted plan, but the groups provided important amendments or additions. We sorted the interventions into six categories: resources for municipalities to develop a collaborative care plan, resources for health professionals, resources for patients and their relatives, outreach visits, educational and web-based tools. Some interventions addressed one determinant, while other interventions addressed several determinants. CONCLUSIONS: It was feasible and helpful to use group interviews and combine open and structured approaches to identify interventions that addressed prioritised determinants to adherence to the recommendations. This approach generated a large number of suggested interventions. We had to prioritise to tailor the interventions strategies.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: It is logical that tailoring implementation strategies to address identified determinants of adherence to clinical practice guidelines should improve adherence. This study aimed to identify and prioritize determinants of adherence to six recommendations for elderly patients with depression. DESIGN AND SETTING: Group and individual interviews and a survey were conducted in Norway. METHOD: Individual and group interviews with healthcare professionals and patients, and a mailed survey of healthcare professionals. A generic checklist of determinants of practice was used to categorize suggested determinants. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians and nurses from primary and specialist care, psychologists, researchers, and patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Determinants of adherence to recommendations for depressed elderly patients in primary care. RESULTS: A total of 352 determinants were identified, of which 99 were prioritized. The most frequently identified factors had to do with dissemination of guidelines, general practitioners' time constraints, the low prioritization of elderly patients with depression, and the patients' or relatives' wish for medication. Approximately three-quarters of the determinants were from three of the seven domains in the generic checklist: individual healthcare professional factors, patient factors, and incentives and resources. The survey did not provide useful information due to a low response rate and a lack of responses to open-ended questions. IMPLICATIONS: The list of prioritized determinants can inform the design of interventions to implement recommendations for elderly patients with depression. The importance of the determinants that were identified may vary across communities, practices. and patients. Interventions that address important determinants are necessary to improve practice.

Asunto(s)