Search

Abstract Background There is little systematic operational guidance about how best to develop complex interventions to reduce the gap between practice and evidence. This article is one in a Series of articles documenting the development and use of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to advance the science of implementation research. Methods The intervention was developed considering three main components: theory, evidence, and practical issues. We used a four-step approach, consisting of guiding questions, to direct the choice of the most appropriate components of an implementation intervention: Who needs to do what, differently? Using a theoretical framework, which barriers and enablers need to be addressed? Which intervention components (behaviour change techniques and mode(s) of delivery) could overcome the modifiable barriers and enhance the enablers? And how can behaviour change be measured and understood? Results A complex implementation intervention was designed that aimed to improve acute low back pain management in primary care. We used the TDF to identify the barriers and enablers to the uptake of evidence into practice and to guide the choice of intervention components. These components were then combined into a cohesive intervention. The intervention was delivered via two facilitated interactive small group workshops. We also produced a DVD to distribute to all participants in the intervention group. We chose outcome measures in order to assess the mediating mechanisms of behaviour change. Conclusions We have illustrated a four-step systematic method for developing an intervention designed to change clinical practice based on a theoretical framework. The method of development provides a systematic framework that could be used by others developing complex implementation interventions. While this framework should be iteratively adjusted and refined to suit other contexts and settings, we believe that the four-step process should be maintained as the primary framework to guide researchers through a comprehensive intervention development process.

Abstract Background Evidence generated from reliable research is not frequently implemented into clinical practice. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are a potential vehicle to achieve this. A recent systematic review of implementation strategies of guideline dissemination concluded that there was a lack of evidence regarding effective strategies to promote the uptake of guidelines. Recommendations from this review, and other studies, have suggested the use of interventions that are theoretically based because these may be more effective than those that are not. An evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the management of acute low back pain was recently developed in Australia. This provides an opportunity to develop and test a theory-based implementation intervention for a condition which is common, has a high burden, and for which there is an evidence-practice gap in the primary care setting. Aim This study aims to test the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention for implementing a clinical practice guideline for acute low back pain in general practice in Victoria, Australia. Specifically, our primary objectives are to establish if the intervention is effective in reducing the percentage of patients who are referred for a plain x-ray, and improving mean level of disability for patients three months post-consultation. Methods/Design This study protocol describes the details of a cluster randomised controlled trial. Ninety-two general practices (clusters), which include at least one consenting general practitioner, will be randomised to an intervention or control arm using restricted randomisation. Patients aged 18 years or older who visit a participating practitioner for acute non-specific low back pain of less than three months duration will be eligible for inclusion. An average of twenty-five patients per general practice will be recruited, providing a total of 2,300 patient participants. General practitioners in the control arm will receive access to the guideline using the existing dissemination strategy. Practitioners in the intervention arm will be invited to participate in facilitated face-to-face workshops that have been underpinned by behavioural theory. Investigators (not involved in the delivery of the intervention), patients, outcome assessors and the study statistician will be blinded to group allocation. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012606000098538 (date registered 14/03/2006).

Rationale, aims, and objectives: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common presentation to general practitioners (GPs). There is increasing antimicrobial resistance in urinary pathogens in many healthcare systems. Adherence to principles of antimicrobial stewardship is important to combat this problem. Our aim was to describe the prevalence of presentations of clinically diagnosed new UTI to early‐career GPs, to describe management choices made, and to identify associations of prescribing antibiotics at the index consultation for UTI. Method: This is a cross‐sectional analysis of the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training cohort study. Early‐career GPs from five Australian states (urban to very remote practices) collected data on 60 consecutive patient encounters during each of three 6‐month training terms. Proportions of problems being new UTIs, antibiotics prescribed, urine microscopy and culture ordered were calculated. Univariate and multivariable logistic regressions established associations of patient, registrar, and practice factors with prescribing antibiotics for a new UTI. Results: One thousand three hundred thirty‐three early‐career GPs diagnosed 2850 new UTIs from 189 736 consultations (1.5%; 95% CI, 1.4‐1.6). Antibiotics were prescribed at 86% (95% CI, 84.7‐87.2) of these index consultations. Antibiotic choice followed Australian therapeutic guideline recommendations. Urine microscopy and culture were requested at the index consultation less than recommended by guidelines in men, 69.2% (95% CI, 62.6‐75.1), and children, 80.8% (95% CI, 76.4‐84.6). Adults were significantly more likely to be treated with antibiotics at the index consultation than children under 16. Conclusions: A new UTI is a common presentation to Australian early‐career GPs. There is general adherence to guidelines for antibiotic choice in UTIs. Further research is needed, however, to understand some decisions made when managing UTI in children and men. This may reflect diagnostic uncertainty with consequent attention to antibiotic stewardship by deferring antibiotic prescription. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: General practitioners play an important role in diagnosis and ongoing management of pregnancies. Some GP registrars entering GP training may have had no post‐graduate experience in obstetrics and gynaecology. GP registrars' involvement in antenatal care is under‐researched. Aims: This study aimed to determine the prevalence and associations of Australian GP registrars' clinical consultations involving antenatal care. Materials and Methods: A cross‐sectional analysis from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study. GP registrars record details of 60 consecutive consultations during each of three six‐month training terms. Associations of managing pregnancy‐related problems (compared to all other problems) were analysed using univariate and multivariable logistic regression. Independent variables included registrar, practice, patient, consultation and educational factors. Results: Antenatal care comprised 3277 (1.1%) of registrar problems/diagnoses. Consultations involving pregnancy‐related problems were significantly associated with registrars being female, in term three, younger, and having post‐graduate qualifications in obstetrics/gynaecology. Patients were significantly more likely to be from a non‐English speaking background. Pregnancy‐related problems/diagnoses were more likely to be seen in lower socioeconomic areas. Consultation factors significantly associated with a pregnancy‐related problem/diagnosis included ordering imaging, ordering pathology, arranging referrals, and a longer duration of consultation. Registrars were less likely to prescribe medication or generate learning goals. Conclusions: GP registrars see fewer antenatal problems compared to established GPs. Male registrars, especially, have significantly less exposure to antenatal care, suggesting potential limitation of opportunity to gain skills and experience in antenatal care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with mental health conditions commonly present in General Practice. Mental health curricula are broad. We do not know that trainees are exposed to the learning they require. This study aimed to establish the prevalence, characteristics and associations of GP trainees' management of mental health problems. This paper presents a cross-sectional analysis of the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) study, an ongoing multisite cohort study of Australian GP trainees (registrars) documenting their clinical experiences over 60 consecutive consultations. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted with outcome of the problem/diagnosis being a mental health condition. 1659 trainees provided data on 218,325 consultations and 340,453 problems/diagnoses. Mental health conditions were associated with patients being male, of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander or English-speaking background. Trainee characteristics were being more senior and having trained in Australia. Practice characteristics included being in low socioeconomic areas. Trainees sought less help for mental health concerns than they did for other problems. While early-career GPs see a broad range of mental health conditions, they may benefit from training to manage patients from cross-cultural contexts. They may also need support to generate appropriate learning goals and seek assistance if they are to continue to deepen competence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Transient ischemic attack incurs a risk of recurrent stroke that can be dramatically reduced by urgent guideline-recommended management at the point of first medical contact. Aims This study describes the prevalence and associations of new transient ischemic attack presentations to general practice registrars and the management undertaken. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training cohort study. General practice registrars from five Australian states (urban to very remote practices) collected data on 60 consecutive patient encounters during each of their three six-month training terms. The proportion of problems managed being new transient ischemic attacks and proportion of transient ischemic attacks with guideline-recommended management were calculated. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression established associations of patient, registrar, and practice factors with a problem being a new transient ischemic attack. Results A total 1331 general practice registrars contributed data (response rate 95.8%). Of the 250,625 problems, there were 65 new transient ischemic attacks diagnosed (0.03% [95% confidence interval: 0.02–0.03%]). General practice registrars were more likely to seek help, generate learning goals, and spend more time for a new transient ischemic attack compared to other problems. Compliance with management guidelines was modest: 15.4% ordered brain and arterial imaging, 36.9% prescribed antiplatelet medication, and 3.1% prescribed antihypertensive medication. Conclusions Transient ischemic attack is a very infrequent presentation for general practice registrars, giving little clinical opportunity to reinforce training program education regarding guideline-recommended management. General practice registrars found transient ischemic attacks challenging and management was not ideal. Since most transient ischemic attacks first present to general practice and urgent management is essential, an enhanced model of care utilizing rapid access to specialist transient ischemic attack support and follow-up could improve guideline compliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inappropriate antibiotic prescription and consequent antibacterial resistance is a major threat to healthcare.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of a multifaceted intervention in reducing early career general practitioners' (GPs') antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) and acute bronchitis/bronchiolitis.Methods: A pragmatic non-randomized trial employing a non-equivalent control group design nested within an existing cohort study of GP registrars' (trainees') clinical practice. The intervention included access to online modules (covering the rationale of current clinical guidelines recommending non-prescription of antibiotics for URTI and bronchitis/bronchiolitis, and communication skills in management of acute bronchitis) followed by a face-to-face educational session. The intervention was delivered to registrars (and their supervisors) in two of Australia's seventeen regional GP training providers (RTPs). Three other RTPs were the control group. Outcomes were proportion of registrars' URTI consultations and bronchitis/bronchiolitis consultations prescribed antibiotics. Intention-to-treat analyses employed logistic regression within a Generalised Estimating Equation framework, adjusted for relevant independent variables. The predictors of interest were time; treatment group; and an interaction term for time-by-treatment group. The P value associated with an interaction term determined statistically significant differences in antibiotic prescribing.Results: Analyses include data of 217 intervention RTPs' and 311 control RTPs' registrars. There was no significant reduction in antibiotic prescribing for URTIs. For bronchitis/bronchiolitis, a significant reduction (interaction P value = 0.024) remained true for analysis adjusted for independent variables (P value = 0.040). The adjusted absolute reduction in prescribing was 15.8% (95% CI: 4.2%-27.5%).Conclusions: A multifaceted intervention reduced antibiotic prescribing for bronchitis/bronchiolitis but not URTIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]