Search

Contains fulltext : 191361.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Decision aids can be used to support shared decision making (SDM). A patient-oriented treatment decision aid (DA) was developed for type 2 diabetes but its use by general practice staff appeared to be limited. OBJECTIVES: To explore views of practice staff towards SDM and the DA. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study within the Dutch PORTDA-diab trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Included were 17 practices with staff members who were responsible for routine diabetes care and had worked with the DA, and 209 of their patients. METHODS: Interviews were conducted focusing on applicability, usefulness and feasibility of the DA. Interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to content analysis for identifying and classifying views. Patient-reported data about the use of the DA were collected. Associations between specific views and use of the DA were tested using Pearson point-biserial correlation. RESULTS: The majority of practice staff expressed positive views towards SDM, which was associated with making more use of the DA. Most of the staff expressed that the DA stimulated a two-way conversation. By using the DA, several became aware of their paternalistic approach. Some staff experienced a conflict with the content of the DA, which was associated with making less use of the DA. CONCLUSIONS: The DA was considered useful by practice staff to support SDM. A positive view towards SDM was a facilitator, whereas experiencing a conflict with the content of the DA was a barrier for making use of the DA.

Background:\ud \ud The material practices which researchers use in research partnerships may enable or constrain the nature of engagement with stakeholder groups. Participatory learning and action (PLA) research approaches show promise, but there has been no detailed analysis of stakeholders’ and researchers’ experiences of PLA techniques for data generation and co-analysis.\ud Objectives:\ud \ud To explore stakeholders’ and researchers’ experiences of PLA techniques for data generation and co-analysis.\ud Design:\ud \ud The EU RESTORE implementation science project employed a participatory approach to investigate and support the implementation of guidelines and training initiatives (GTIs) to enhance communication in cross-cultural primary care consultations. We developed a purposeful sample of 78 stakeholders (migrants, general practice staff, community interpreters, service providers, service planners) from primary care settings in Austria, England, Greece, Ireland and The Netherlands. We used speed evaluations and participatory evaluations to explore their experiences of two PLA techniques—Commentary Charts and Direct Ranking—which were intended to generate data for co-analysis by stakeholders about the GTIs under analysis. We evaluated 16 RESTORE researchers’ experiences using interviews. We conducted thematic and content analysis of all evaluation data.\ud Results:\ud \ud PLA Commentary Charts and Direct Ranking techniques, with their visual, verbal and tangible nature and inherent analytical capabilities, were found to be powerful tools for involving stakeholders in a collaborative analysis of GTIs. Stakeholders had few negative experiences and numerous multifaceted positive experiences of meaningful engagement, which resonated with researchers’ accounts.\ud Conclusion:\ud \ud PLA techniques and approaches are valuable as material practices in health research partnerships.

Background: Medication adherence is vital to ensuring optimal patient outcomes, particularly amongst multimorbid older people prescribed multiple medications. Interventions targeting adherence often lack a theoretical underpinning and this may impact on effectiveness. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) of behaviour can aid intervention development by systematically identifying key determinants of medication adherence.\ud \ud \ud Objectives: This study aimed to (i) identify determinants (barriers, facilitators) of adherence to multiple medications from older people's perspectives; (ii) identify key domains to target for behaviour change; and (iii) map key domains to intervention components [behaviour change techniques (BCTs)] that could be delivered in an intervention by community pharmacists.\ud Method\ud \ud Focus groups were conducted with older people (>65 years) receiving ≥4 medications. Questions explored the 12 domains of the TDF (eg “Knowledge,” “Emotion”). Data were analysed using the framework method and content analysis. Identification of key domains and mapping to intervention components (BCTs) followed established methods.\ud \ud \ud Results: Seven focus groups were convened (50 participants). A wide range of determinants were identified as barriers (eg forgetfulness, prioritization of medications) and facilitators (eg social support, personalized routines) of adherence to multiple medications. Eight domains were identified as key targets for behaviour change (eg “Social influences,” “Memory, attention and decision processes,” “Motivation and goals”) and mapped to 11 intervention components (BCTs) to include in an intervention [eg “Social support or encouragement (general),” “Self-monitoring of the behaviour,” “Goal-setting (behaviour)”].\ud \ud \ud Conclusion: This study used a theoretical underpinning to identify potential intervention components (BCTs). Future work will incorporate the selected BCTs into an intervention that will undergo feasibility testing in community pharmacies.

Background Chronic diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide. In Canada, more than half of all health care spending is used for managing chronic diseases. Although studies have shown that the use of advanced features of electronic medical record (EMR) systems improves the quality of chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM), a 2012 international survey found that Canadian physicians were the least likely to use 2 or more EMR system functions. Some studies show that maturity vis-à-vis clinicians’ EMR use is an important factor when evaluating the use of advanced features of health information systems. The Clinical Adoption Framework (CAF), a common evaluation framework used to assess the success of EMR adoption, does not incorporate the process of maturing. Nevertheless, the CAF and studies that discuss the barriers to and facilitators of the adoption of EMR systems can be the basis for exploring the use of advanced EMR features. Objective This study aimed to explore the factors that primary care physicians in Ontario identified as influencing their use of advanced EMR features to support CDPM and to extend the CAF to include primary care physicians’ perceptions of how their use of EMRs for performing clinical tasks has matured. Methods Guided by the CAF, directed content analysis was used to explore the barriers and facilitating factors encountered by primary care physicians when using EMR features. Participants were primary care physicians in Ontario, Canada, who use EMRs. Data were coded using categories from the CAF. Results A total of 9 face-to-face interviews were conducted from January 2017 to July 2017. Dimensions from the CAF emerged from the data, and one new dimension was derived: physicians’ perception of their maturity of EMR use. Primary care physicians identified the following key factors that impacted their use of advanced EMR features: performance of EMR features, information quality of EMR features, training and technical support, user satisfaction, provider’s productivity, personal characteristics and roles, cost benefits of EMR features, EMR systems infrastructure, funding, and government leadership. Conclusions The CAF was extended to include physicians’ perceptions of how their use of EMR systems had matured. Most participants agreed that their use of EMR systems for performing clinical tasks had evolved since their adoption of the system and that certain system features facilitated their care for patients with chronic diseases. However, several barriers were identified and should be addressed to further enhance primary care physicians’ use of advanced EMR features to support CDPM.

Background Text messaging (short message service, SMS) interventions show promise as a way to help cigarette smokers quit. Few studies have examined the effectiveness of text messaging (SMS) programs targeting smokers associated with primary care or hospital settings. Objective This study aimed to develop a text messaging (SMS) program targeting primary care smokers. Methods Adult smokers in primary care were recruited from February 2017 to April 2017. We sent patients 10 to 11 draft text messages (SMS) over 2 days and asked them to rate each message in real time. Patients were interviewed daily by telephone to discuss ratings, message preferences, and previous experiences with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Content analysis of interviews was directed by a step-wise text messaging (SMS) intervention development process and the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills model of medication adherence. Results We sent 149 text messages (SMS) to 15 patients. They replied with ratings for 93% (139/149) of the messages: 134 (96%, 134/139) were rated as clear or useful and 5 (4%, 5/139) as unclear or not useful. Patients' preferences included the addition of graphics, electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) content, and use of first names. Regarding NRT, patients identified informational gaps around safety and effectiveness, preferred positively framed motivational messages, and needed behavioral skills to dose and dispose of NRT. Conclusions Patients recommended text message (SMS) personalization, inclusion of e-cigarette information and graphics, and identified barriers to NRT use. Combining real-time ratings with telephone interviews is a feasible method for incorporating primary care patients' preferences into a behavioral text messaging (SMS) program.

Background Although teamwork is known to optimise good health care, organisational arrangements and funding models can foster, discourage, or preclude functional teamworking. Despite a new, enhanced population-based funding system for primary care in New Zealand, bringing new opportunities for more collaborative practice, fully implemented healthcare teamwork remains elusive. Aim To explore perceptions of interprofessional relationships, teamwork, and collaborative patient care in New Zealand primary care practice. Design of study Qualitative. Setting Eighteen nurses and doctors working in primary care, Wellington, New Zealand. Method Data were collected using in-depth interviews with individual nurses and doctors working in primary care settings. Perceptions of, and attitudes about, interprofessional relationships, teamwork, and collaborative patient care were explored, using an interactive process of content analysis and principles of naturalistic enquiry. Results Nurses and doctors working in New Zealand primary care perceive funding models that include fee-for-service, task-based components as strongly discouraging collaborative patient care. In contrast, teamwork was seen to be promoted when health services, not individual practitioners, were bulk-funded for capitated healthcare provision. In well-organised practices, where priority was placed on uninterrupted time for meetings, open communication, and interprofessional respect, good teamwork was more often observed. Salaried practices, where doctors and nurses alike were employees, were considered by some interviewees to be particularly supportive of good teamwork. Few interviewees had received, or knew of, any training to work in teams. Conclusion Health system, funding, and organisational factors still act as significant barriers to the successful implementation of, and training for, effective teamwork in New Zealand primary care settings, despite new opportunities for more collaborative ways of working.

Background Polypharmacy is an increasing challenge for primary care. Although sometimes clinically justified, polypharmacy can be inappropriate, leading to undesirable outcomes. Optimising care for polypharmacy necessitates effective targeting and monitoring of interventions. This requires a valid, reliable measure of polypharmacy, relevant for all patients, that considers clinical appropriateness and generic prescribing issues applicable across all medications. Whilst there are several existing measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing, these are not specifically designed with polypharmacy in mind, can require extensive clinical input to complete, and often cover a limited number of drugs. The aim of this study was to identify what experts consider to be the key elements of a measure of prescribing appropriateness in the context of polypharmacy. Methods Firstly, we conducted a systematic review to identify generic (not drug specific) prescribing indicators relevant to polypharmacy appropriateness. Indicators were subject to content analysis to enable categorisation. Secondly, we convened a panel of 10 clinical experts to review the identified indicators and assess their relative clinical importance. For each indicator category, a brief evidence summary was developed, based on relevant clinical and indicator literature, clinical guidance, and opinions obtained from a separate patient discussion panel. A two-stage RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to reach consensus amongst the panel on a core set of indicators of polypharmacy appropriateness. Results We identified 20,879 papers for title/abstract screening, obtaining 273 full papers. We extracted 189 generic indicators, and presented 160 to the panel grouped into 18 classifications (e.g. adherence, dosage, clinical efficacy). After two stages, during which the panel introduced 18 additional indicators, there was consensus that 134 indicators were of clinical importance. Following the application of decision rules and further panel consultation, 12 indicators were placed into the final selection. Panel members particularly valued indicators concerned with adverse drug reactions, contraindications, drug-drug interactions, and the conduct of medication reviews. Conclusions We have identified a set of 12 indicators of clinical importance considered relevant to polypharmacy appropriateness. Use of these indicators in clinical practice and informatics systems is dependent on their operationalisation and their utility (e.g. risk stratification, targeting and monitoring polypharmacy interventions) requires subsequent evaluation. Trial registration Registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42016049176). Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-018-1078-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Much of the research on decision-making in health care has focused on consultation outcomes. Less is known about the process by which clinicians and patients come to a treatment decision. This study aimed to quantitatively describe the behaviour shown by doctors and patients during primary care consultations when three types of decision aids were used to promote treatment decision-making in a randomised controlled trial. Methods A video-based study set in an efficacy trial which compared the use of paper-based guidelines (control) with two forms of computer-based decision aids (implicit and explicit versions of DARTS II). Treatment decision concerned warfarin anti-coagulation to reduce the risk of stroke in older patients with atrial fibrillation. Twenty nine consultations were video-recorded. A ten-minute 'slice' of the consultation was sampled for detailed content analysis using existing interaction analysis protocols for verbal behaviour and ethological techniques for non-verbal behaviour. Results Median consultation times (quartiles) differed significantly depending on the technology used. Paper-based guidelines took 21 (19–26) minutes to work through compared to 31 (16–41) minutes for the implicit tool; and 44 (39–55) minutes for the explicit tool. In the ten minutes immediately preceding the decision point, GPs dominated the conversation, accounting for 64% (58–66%) of all utterances and this trend was similar across all three arms of the trial. Information-giving was the most frequent activity for both GPs and patients, although GPs did this at twice the rate compared to patients and at higher rates in consultations involving computerised decision aids. GPs' language was highly technically focused and just 7% of their conversation was socio-emotional in content; this was half the socio-emotional content shown by patients (15%). However, frequent head nodding and a close mirroring in the direction of eye-gaze suggested that both parties were active participants in the conversation Conclusion Irrespective of the arm of the trial, both patients' and GPs' behaviour showed that they were reciprocally engaged in these consultations. However, even in consultations aimed at promoting shared decision-making, GPs' were verbally dominant, and they worked primarily as information providers for patients. In addition, computer-based decision aids significantly prolonged the consultations, particularly the later phases. These data suggest that decision aids may not lead to more 'sharing' in treatment decision-making and that, in their current form, they may take too long to negotiate for use in routine primary care.

Cystic fibrosis carrier testing (CFCT) is among the first of the DNA tests offered prenatally in primary care settings. This paper from a descriptive qualitative study describes the influence of pregnancy in CFCT decisions by women receiving community-based prenatal care. Twenty-seven women receiving prenatal care in Midwestern U.S. primary care clinics completed semistructured interviews. Audiotaped interviews were analyzed using content analysis. Participants described decision-making influences and strategies from the perspective of “being pregnant.” Patterns of attitudes and beliefs include (1) dealing with emotions, (2) pregnancy is natural, and (3) thinking about the baby. Strategies in the decision-making process included (1) reducing stress, (2) choosing what is relevant, (3) doing everything right, (4) wanting to be prepared, (5) delaying information, and (6) trusting God. While other factors were mentioned by some women, major themes reflect the influence of currently being pregnant on the decision-making process. These findings suggest that pregnancy is a powerful influence on the decision-making process and may not be the optimal time to make fully informed decisions regarding genetic carrier testing. Further understanding of factors influencing the genetic testing decision-making process is needed. Offering CFCT prior to conception is advocated.