Search

Background and Aims: Non‐invasive tests (NITs) are underutilized for diagnosis and risk stratification in metabolic dysfunction‐associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), despite good accuracy. This study aimed to identify challenges and barriers to the use of NITs in clinical practice. Methods: We conducted a qualitative exploratory study in Germany, Italy, United Kingdom and United States. Phase 1 participants (primary care physicians, hepatologists, diabetologists, researchers, healthcare administrators, payers and patient advocates; n = 29) were interviewed. Phase 2 participants (experts in MASLD; n = 8) took part in a group discussion to validate and expand on Phase 1 findings. Finally, we triangulated perspectives in a hybrid deductive/inductive thematic analysis. Results: Four themes hindering the use of NITs emerged: (1) limited knowledge and awareness; (2) unclear referral pathways for patients affected by liver conditions; (3) uncertainty over the value of NITs in monitoring and managing liver diseases; and (4) challenges justifying system‐level reimbursement. Through these themes, participants perceived a stigma associated with liver diseases, and primary care physicians generally lacked awareness, adequate knowledge and skills to use recommended NITs. We identified uncertainties over the results of NITs, specifically to guide lifestyle intervention or to identify patients that should be referred to a specialist. Participants indicated an ongoing need for research and development to improve the prognostic value of NITs and communicating their cost‐effectiveness to payers. Conclusions: This qualitative study suggests that use of NITs for MASLD is limited due to several individual and system‐level barriers. Multi‐level interventions are likely required to address these barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To evaluate the self‐reported leadership practices and behaviours of health professionals following a leadership program and explore factors that impacted leadership style. Design: An online cross‐sectional survey was conducted from August to October 2022. Methods: The survey was disseminated via email to leadership program graduates. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Form—6S was used to measure leadership style. Results: Eighty completed surveys were included in the analysis. Participants scored highest on transformational leadership and lowest on passive/avoidant leadership style. Participants with higher qualifications scored significantly higher in the inspirational motivation scores (p = 0.03). As years in their profession increased, there was a significant decrease in contingent reward scores (p = 0.04). The younger participants scored significantly higher on the management‐by‐exception than older participants (p = 0.05). There were no significant associations with the year the leadership program was completed, gender or profession and Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Form ‐ 6S scores. Most participants (72.5%) strongly agreed that the program enhanced their leadership development and 91.3% strongly agreed or agreed that they routinely apply the skills and knowledge learnt in the program in their workplace. Conclusion: Formal leadership education is important in developing a transformational nursing workforce. This study found that program graduates had adopted a transformational leadership style. Education, years of experience and age impacted the specific leadership elements. Future work needs to incorporate longitudinal follow‐up to relate changes in leadership with impact on clinical practice. Implications for the Profession: Transformational leadership as a dominant style can contribute to nurses and other disciplines positively contributing to innovative and person‐centred approaches to health service delivery. Summary Statement: What already is known—Leadership amongst nurses and other health professionals impacts patients, staff, organizations and ultimately healthcare culture.What this paper adds—Formal leadership education is important in developing a transformational healthcare workforce.Implications for practice/policy—Transformational leadership can enhance nurses and other disciplines commitment to innovative and person‐centred approaches. Impact Statement: This research identifies that lessons learnt from formal leadership education are retained over time by healthcare providers. This is important for nursing staff, and other healthcare providers, who are leading teams and overseeing care delivery, can ensure leadership behaviours and practices are enacted to influence a transformational workforce and culture. Reporting Method: This study adhered to STROBE guidelines. No Patient or Public Contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The introduction of new targeted therapies for RET-altered lung and thyroid cancers (LC/TC) has impacted pathologists’ practice by making genomic testing more relevant. Variations in health systems and treatment access result in distinct clinical challenges and barriers. This study aimed to assess practice gaps and challenges experienced by pathologists involved in the diagnosis of RET-altered LC/TC, including biomarker testing, to inform educational solutions. Methods: Pathologists in Germany, Japan, the UK, and US participated in this ethics-approved mixed-methods study, which included interviews and surveys (data collected January-March 2020). Qualitative data was thematically analysed, quantitative data was analysed with chi-square and Kruskal–Wallis H-tests, and both were triangulated. Results: A total of 107 pathologists took part in this study. Knowledge gaps were reported regarding genomic testing for LC/TC in Japan (79/60%), the UK (73/66%), and the US (53/30%). Skill gaps were reported when selecting genomic biomarker tests to diagnose TC in Japan (79%), the UK (73%) and US (57%) and when performing specific biomarker tests, especially in Japan (82% for RET) and in the UK (75% for RET). Japanese participants (80%) reported uncertainty about what information to share with the multidisciplinary team to ensure optimal patient-centered care. At the time of data collection, pathologists in Japan faced access barriers to using RET biomarker tests: only 28% agreed that there are relevant RET genomic biomarker tests available in Japan, versus 67% to 90% in other countries. Conclusions: This study identified areas where pathologists need additional continuing professional development opportunities to enhance their competencies and better support delivery of care to patients with RET-altered lung or thyroid tumours. Addressing identified gaps and improving competencies of pathologists in this field should be emphasised in continuing medical education curricula and through quality improvement initiatives. Strategies deployed on an institutional and health system level should aim to improve interprofessional communication and genetic biomarker testing expertise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Governments and healthcare organizations in Canada are reforming the clinical practice structures and policies to deliver primary care to the population. A key component of primary healthcare reform is the establishment of an interdisciplinary, community-based team approach to patient care. This study was undertaken to provide in-depth insight regarding primary healthcare providers' beliefs and attitudes in regard to their current group practice, what changes they believe are occurring and those necessary to reform group practice settings, their willingness to embrace changes, and the challenges they face to realize the proposed reform. Methods: This study employed a mixed-method research design (qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques) through day-long focus groups of primary healthcare professionals (eg, family physicians, specialists, dieticians, psychologists) from across Canada. Results: There is considerable variation in the composition of primary care group practices across Canada. Respondents report that group practices are little more than an economic convenience to facilitate sharing of resources. Even when a practice is composed of several disciplines, there is little to no organized or systematic interaction among healthcare professionals aimed at improving patient care, lack of clarity as to identified leaders/managers of the team, and inconsistencies in the model of care provided to patients. However, there is a perception of value and benefit in working in a cohesive group practice to improve patient care. Discussion: Findings revealed that although healthcare providers report themselves ready to make the necessary changes and willing to move to interdisciplinary team-based practices, there are substantive challenges that impede a movement to truly effective interdisciplinary team practice and functioning. These challenges include the type and allocation of funding, interprofessional healthcare provider education, changing the healthcare provision model, and barriers among healthcare professionals regarding shared and equitable team accountability for patient health outcomes. (Contains 2 figures.)

Introduction: A significant gap exists between science and clinical practice guidelines, on the one hand, and actual clinical practice, on the other. An in-depth understanding of the barriers and incentives contributing to the gap can lead to interventions that effect change toward optimal practice and thus to better care. Methods: A systematic review of English language studies involving human subjects and published from January 1998 to March 2007 yielded 256 articles that fulfilled established criteria. The analysis was guided by two research questions: How are barriers are assessed? and What types of barriers are identified? The studies abstracted were coded according to 33 emerging themes; placed into seven categories that typified the barriers; grouped as to whether they involved the health care professional, the guideline, the scientific evidence, the patient, or the health system; and organized according to relationship pattern between barriers. Results: The results expand our understanding of how multiple factors pose barriers to optimal clinical practice. The review reveals increasing numbers of behavioral and system barriers. Quantitative survey type assessments continue to dominate barrier research; however, an increasing number of qualitative and mixed-method study designs have emerged recently. Discussion: The findings establish the evolution of research methodologies and emerging barriers to the translation of knowing to doing. While many studies are methodologically weak, there are indications that designs are becoming more aligned with the complexity of the health care environment. The review provides support for the need to examine multiple factors within the knowledge-to-action process.