Search

Background The theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) was developed in response to recommendations that acceptability should be assessed in the design, evaluation and implementation phases of healthcare interventions. The TFA consists of seven component constructs (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy) that can help to identify characteristics of interventions that may be improved. The aim of this study was to develop a generic TFA questionnaire that can be adapted to assess acceptability of any healthcare intervention. Methods Two intervention-specific acceptability questionnaires based on the TFA were developed using a 5-step pre-validation method for developing patient-reported outcome instruments: 1) item generation; 2) item de-duplication; 3) item reduction and creation; 4) assessment of discriminant content validity against a pre-specified framework (TFA); 5) feedback from key stakeholders. Next, a generic TFA-based questionnaire was developed and applied to assess prospective and retrospective acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine. A think-aloud method was employed with two samples: 10 participants who self-reported intention to have the COVID-19 vaccine, and 10 participants who self-reported receiving a first dose of the vaccine. Results 1) The item pool contained 138 items, identified from primary papers included in an overview of reviews. 2) There were no duplicate items. 3) 107 items were discarded; 35 new items were created to maximise coverage of the seven TFA constructs. 4) 33 items met criteria for discriminant content validity and were reduced to two intervention-specific acceptability questionnaires, each with eight items. 5) Feedback from key stakeholders resulted in refinement of item wording, which was then adapted to develop a generic TFA-based questionnaire. For prospective and retrospective versions of the questionnaire, no participants identified problems with understanding and answering items reflecting four TFA constructs: affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, opportunity costs. Some participants encountered problems with items reflecting three constructs: ethicality, intervention coherence, self-efficacy. Conclusions A generic questionnaire for assessing intervention acceptability from the perspectives of intervention recipients was developed using methods for creating participant-reported outcome measures, informed by theory, previous research, and stakeholder input. The questionnaire provides researchers with an adaptable tool to measure acceptability across a range of healthcare interventions.

Background Patients who deteriorate in hospital wards without appropriate recognition and/or response are at risk of increased morbidity and mortality. Track-and-trigger tools have been implemented internationally prompting healthcare practitioners (typically nursing staff) to recognise physiological changes (e.g. changes in blood pressure, heart rate) consistent with patient deterioration, and then to contact a practitioner with expertise in management of acute/critical illness. Despite some evidence these tools improve patient outcomes, their translation into clinical practice is inconsistent internationally. To drive greater guideline adherence in the use of the National Early Warning Score tool (a track-and-trigger tool used widely in the United Kingdom and parts of Europe), a theoretically informed implementation intervention was developed (targeting nursing staff) using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) version 2 and a taxonomy of Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs). Methods A three-stage process was followed: 1. TDF domains representing important barriers and enablers to target behaviours derived from earlier published empirical work were mapped to appropriate BCTs; 2. BCTs were shortlisted using consensus approaches within the research team; 3. shortlisted BCTs were presented to relevant stakeholders in two online group discussions where nominal group techniques were applied. Nominal group participants were healthcare leaders, senior clinicians, and ward-based nursing staff. Stakeholders individually generated concrete strategies for operationalising shortlisted BCTs (‘applications’) and privately ranked them according to acceptability and feasibility. Ranking data were used to drive decision-making about intervention content. Results Fifty BCTs (mapped in stage 1) were shortlisted to 14 (stage 2) and presented to stakeholders in nominal groups (stage 3) alongside example applications. Informed by ranking data from nominal groups, the intervention was populated with 12 BCTs that will be delivered face-to-face, to individuals and groups of nursing staff, through 18 applications. Conclusions A description of a theory-based behaviour change intervention is reported, populated with BCTs and applications generated and/or prioritised by stakeholders using replicable consensus methods. The feasibility of the proposed intervention should be tested in a clinical setting and the content of the intervention elaborated further to permit replication and evaluation.

Background: Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) reduce physical activity to avoid the onset of breathlessness. Fan therapy (FT) can reduce breathlessness at rest, but the efficacy of FT during exercise remains unknown. \ud \ud Aim: To investigate 1) the effect of FT on exercise-induced breathlessness and post-exercise recovery time, 2) the acceptability of FT d 3) the reproducibility of any observed improvements.\ud \ud Methods: A pilot single-centre randomised controlled crossover, open trial of FT vs no FT during 6-minute walk test (6MWT) in patients with COPD and a Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea score ≥ 2. Breathlessness intensity was quantified pre and on termination of the 6MWT, using the numerical rating scale (NRS). Post-exertional recovery time was defined as the time taken to return to baseline NRS breathlessness score.\ud \ud Results: Fourteen patients completed the trial per protocol (4 = male, 10 = female; median age (interquartile range) = 66.50 (60.75 -73.5) years); mMRC dyspoena 3 (2-3)). Fan therapy resulted in lower exercise-induced breathlessness (∆ NRS; ∆ mBORG) [within-individual differences in medians (WIDiM) = -1.0, IQR = -2.00 to -0.50, p

Objectives\ud To explore facilitators and barriers to the implementation of a physiological approach to care during labour and birth in obstetric settings.\ud To explore how facilitators and barriers located at three levels: organisation, professional groups (midwives and obstetricians) and women, interact to influence the implementation of a physiological approach.\ud \ud Method\ud A systematic review of the literature, identified 32 eligible studies from four databases reporting relevant qualitative data. Findings from these studies were thematically synthesised in three phases: line by line coding of findings from primary studies, development of descriptive themes and analytical themes. This review is reported in line with PRISMA guidelines.\ud \ud Findings\ud At an organisational level, centralisation of care in obstetric units limited time for labouring and professional care to support a physiological labour and birth. Risk management strategies ostensibly designed to promote safety sustained a risk-based approach. At a professional level, important barriers include hierarchical decision-making led by obstetricians, midwifery acquiescence, obstetric and midwifery risk preoccupation, rationalisation of the routine use of clinical intervention and an erosion of midwifery skills and knowledge. At the level of the woman, barriers include a lack of knowledge and reliance on professional decision-making. Facilitators include collaborative working by midwives and obstetricians, a valuing of midwifery autonomy and women's questioning of inappropriate intervention use.\ud \ud Key conclusions\ud Contrary to evidence-based guidelines that recommend a physiological approach, a risk-based approach informs practices in obstetric units. Primary research has mainly identified barriers to implementing a physiological approach at a professional level, and this has been studied largely from a midwifery perspective. To aid comprehensive investigations of facilitators and barriers and their interactive influences, this review identifies important research gaps for study across all levels: organisation, professionals (midwives and obstetricians) and women.\ud \ud Implications for practice\ud Risk preoccupations and rationalisation, with negative influences on knowledge and skills in the use of a physiological approach, must prompt reflection and action amongst professional groups. Power imbalances between midwives and obstetricians need to be addressed, drawing on experiences in units where collaborative working and midwifery autonomy is fostered.

Watt et al. [J Eng Math 75(1):1–14, 2012] have shown that one can obtain good results for the propagation of detonation waves in cylindrical charges by assuming that the post-shock streamlines are straight. In this paper, we compare this Straight Streamline Approximation (SSA) to high-resolution Direct Numerical Simulations (DNS) for different models of explosives. We find that the SSA is less accurate for realistic explosion models than it is for polytropic equations of state with power-law reaction rates.