51
|
van Lieshout J, Steenkamer B, Knippenberg M, Wensing M. Improvement of primary care for patients with chronic heart failure: a study protocol for a cluster randomised trial comparing two strategies. Implement Sci 2011; 6:28. [PMID: 21439047 PMCID: PMC3072349 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-28] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2010] [Accepted: 03/25/2011] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Many patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), a common condition with high morbidity and mortality rates, receive treatment in primary care. To improve the management of CHF in primary care, we developed an implementation programme comprised of educational and organisational components, with support by a practice visitor and focus both on drug treatment and lifestyle advice, and on organisation of care within the practice and collaboration with other healthcare providers. Tailoring has been shown to improve the success of implementation programmes, but little is known about what would be best methods for tailoring, specifically with respect to CHF in primary care. Methods/design We describe the study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial to examine the effectiveness of tailoring a CHF implementation programme to general practices compared to a standardised way of delivering a programme. The study population will consist of 60 general practitioners (GPs) and the CHF patients they include. GPs are randomised in blocks of four, stratified according to practice size. With a tailored implementation programme GPs prioritise the issues that will form the bases of the support for the practice visits. These may comprise several issues, both educational and organizational. The primary outcome measures are patient's experience of receiving structured primary care for CHF (PACIC, a questionnaire related to the Chronic Care Model), patients' health-related utilities (EQ-5D), and drugs prescriptions using the guideline adherence index. Patients being clustered in practices, multilevel regression analyses will be used to explore the effect of practice size and type of intervention programme. In addition we will examine both changes within groups and differences at follow-up between groups with respect to drug dosages and advice on lifestyle issues. Furthermore, in interviews the feasibility of the programme and goal attainment, organisational changes in CHF care, and formalised cooperation with other disciplines will be assessed. Discussion In the tailoring of the programme we will present the GPs a list with barriers; GPs will assess relevance and possibility to solve these barriers. The list is rigorously developed and tested in various projects. The factors for ordering the barriers are related to the innovation, the healthcare professional, the patient, and the context. CHF patients do not form a homogeneous group. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on the distinction between systolic CHF and CHF with preserved left ventricular function (diastolic CHF). Trial registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN18812755
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan van Lieshout
- Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, P,O, Box 9101, 114 IQ Healthcare, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
52
|
Bhogal SK, McGillivray D, Bourbeau J, Plotnick LH, Bartlett SJ, Benedetti A, Ducharme FM. Focusing the focus group: impact of the awareness of major factors contributing to non-adherence to acute paediatric asthma guidelines. J Eval Clin Pract 2011; 17:160-7. [PMID: 20860581 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01416.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE The administration of oral corticosteroids within the first hour in the emergency department is associated with reduced hospitalization rates in children with moderate and severe asthma, yet less than half of patients benefit from this recommendation. To ensure patients receive recommended treatment, a clear understanding of what is causing suboptimal care management is needed. The assessment of barriers and solutions to optimal care is often done without a thorough examination of the factors associated with non-adherence. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether knowledge of factors associated with delayed administration of systemic corticosteroids modifies the focus and prioritization of barriers and solutions identified by focus groups. METHODS We conducted two parallel focus groups of emergency health care professionals - one group informed and the other non-informed of key factors. Both groups received a presentation on the acute asthma guidelines, the evidence supporting its recommendations, and current practice. In addition, the informed group was provided with the factors associated and not associated with delayed administration. The groups were given 20 minutes to discuss barriers and solutions, with 5 minutes each for voting for the main barriers and solutions. Group difference in the misdirection of discussion was measured as time spent discussing barriers that were shown not to be associated with systemic corticosteroids. Prioritization of barriers and solutions was based on group endorsement. RESULTS The non-informed group spent more time discussing barriers not associated with delayed administration (15 vs. 2 minutes, P = 0.05). Although the non-informed group proposed more solutions, most were to overcome barriers not associated with delayed administration. Of the main barriers and solutions identified by each group, only one barrier and solution were similar between the two groups: emergency department overcrowding and administrating corticosteroids at triage. CONCLUSION The awareness of objective factors of non-adherence enabled a more directed discussion on relevant barriers and solutions, affecting prioritization of each. The administration of oral corticosteroids at triage appears to be the best solution to overcome delayed administration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanjit Kaur Bhogal
- Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
53
|
Ducharme FM. Knowledge translation approaches to implement guidelines? Plan, assess, tailor, and learn. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol 2010. [PMCID: PMC3026198 DOI: 10.1186/1710-1492-6-s4-a7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
|
54
|
Jeschke E, Ostermann T, Vollmar HC, Kröz M, Bockelbrink A, Witt CM, Willich SN, Matthes H. Evaluation of prescribing patterns in a German network of CAM physicians for the treatment of patients with hypertension: a prospective observational study. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE 2009; 10:78. [PMID: 20003298 PMCID: PMC2804584 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-78] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2009] [Accepted: 12/10/2009] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The management of hypertension is a key challenge in modern health systems. This study aimed to investigate hypertension treatment strategies among physicians specialized in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in Germany by analysing prescribing patterns and comparing these to the current treatment guidelines issued by the German Hypertension Society. METHODS In this prospective, multicentre observational study, which included 25 primary care physicians specialized in CAM treatment, prescriptions and diagnoses were analysed for each consecutive hypertensive patient using routine electronic data. Data analysis was performed using univariate statistical tests (Chi square test, Cochran-Armitage trend test). Multiple logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with antihypertensive medication. RESULTS In the year 2005, 1320 patients with 3278 prescriptions were included (mean age = 64.2 years (SD = 14.5), 63.5% women). Most patients were treated with conventional antihypertensive monotherapies (n = 838, 63.5%). Beta-blockers were the most commonly prescribed monotherapy (30.7%), followed by ACE inhibitors (24.0%). Combination treatment usually consisted of two antihypertensive drugs administered either as separate agents or as a coformulation. The most common combination was a diuretic plus an ACE inhibitor (31.2% of dual therapies). Patient gender, age, and comorbidities significantly influenced which treatment was prescribed. 187 patients (14.2%) received one or more CAM remedies, most of which were administered in addition to classic monotherapies (n = 104). Men (OR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.54-0.80) and patients with diabetes (OR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.42-0.0.73), hypercholesterolaemia (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.47-0.75), obesity (OR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.57-0.97), stroke (OR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.40-0.74), or prior myocardial infarction (OR = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.17-0.81) were less likely to receive CAM treatment. CONCLUSIONS The large majority of antihypertensive treatments prescribed by CAM physicians in the present study complied with the current German Hypertension Society treatment guidelines. Deviations from the guidelines were observed in one of every seven patients receiving some form of CAM treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elke Jeschke
- Havelhoehe Research Institute, Kladower Damm 221, 14089 Berlin, Germany
| | - Thomas Ostermann
- Chair for Theory of Medicine, Integrative and Anthroposophic Medicine, University of Witten/Herdecke, Gerhard-Kienle-Weg 4, 58313 Herdecke, Germany
| | - Horst C Vollmar
- Institute for General Practice and Family Medicine, University of Witten/Herdecke, Alfred-Herrhausen-Str 50, 58448 Witten, Germany
- Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Transfer (ISI), Breslauer Str 48, 76139 Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Matthias Kröz
- Havelhoehe Research Institute, Kladower Damm 221, 14089 Berlin, Germany
| | - Angelina Bockelbrink
- Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Centre, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Claudia M Witt
- Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Centre, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Stefan N Willich
- Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Centre, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Harald Matthes
- Havelhoehe Research Institute, Kladower Damm 221, 14089 Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
Harrison MB, Légaré F, Graham ID, Fervers B. Adapting clinical practice guidelines to local context and assessing barriers to their use. CMAJ 2009; 182:E78-84. [PMID: 19969563 DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.081232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 223] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Margaret B Harrison
- School of Nursing, Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
56
|
Lysdahl KB, Hofmann BM, Espeland A. Radiologists’ responses to inadequate referrals. Eur Radiol 2009; 20:1227-33. [DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1640-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2009] [Revised: 07/26/2009] [Accepted: 08/30/2009] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
57
|
Lysdahl KB, Hofmann BM. What causes increasing and unnecessary use of radiological investigations? A survey of radiologists' perceptions. BMC Health Serv Res 2009; 9:155. [PMID: 19723302 PMCID: PMC2749824 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2009] [Accepted: 09/01/2009] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Growth in use and overuse of diagnostic imaging significantly impacts the quality and costs of health care services. What are the modifiable factors for increasing and unnecessary use of radiological services? Various factors have been identified, but little is known about their relative impact. Radiologists hold key positions for providing such knowledge. Therefore the purpose of this study was to obtain radiologists' perspective on the causes of increasing and unnecessary use of radiological investigations. METHODS In a mailed questionnaire radiologist members of the Norwegian Medical Association were asked to rate potential causes of increased investigation volume (fifteen items) and unnecessary investigations (six items), using five-point-scales. Responses were analysed by using summary statistics and Factor Analysis. Associations between variables were determined using Students' t-test, Spearman rank correlation and Chi-Square tests. RESULTS The response rate was 70% (374/537). The highest rated causes of increasing use of radiological investigations were: a) new radiological technology, b) peoples' demands, c) clinicians' intolerance for uncertainty, d) expanded clinical indications, and e) availability. 'Over-investigation' and 'insufficient referral information' were reported the most frequent causes of unnecessary investigations. Correlations between causes of increasing and unnecessary radiology use were identified. CONCLUSION In order to manage the growth in radiological imaging and curtail inappropriate investigations, the study findings point to measures that influence the supply and demand of services, specifically to support the decision-making process of physicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin B Lysdahl
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo University College, Oslo, Norway
- Section for Medical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Bjørn M Hofmann
- Section for Medical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Faculty of Health Care and Nursing, Gjøvik University College, Gjøvik, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
58
|
Lugtenberg M, Zegers-van Schaick JM, Westert GP, Burgers JS. Why don't physicians adhere to guideline recommendations in practice? An analysis of barriers among Dutch general practitioners. Implement Sci 2009; 4:54. [PMID: 19674440 PMCID: PMC2734568 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-54] [Citation(s) in RCA: 311] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2009] [Accepted: 08/12/2009] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite wide distribution and promotion of clinical practice guidelines, adherence among Dutch general practitioners (GPs) is not optimal. To improve adherence to guidelines, an analysis of barriers to implementation is advocated. Because different recommendations within a guideline can have different barriers, in this study we focus on key recommendations rather than guidelines as a whole, and explore the barriers to implementation perceived by Dutch GPs. METHODS A qualitative study using six focus groups was conducted, in which 30 GPs participated, with an average of seven per session. Fifty-six key recommendations were derived from twelve national guidelines. In each focus group, barriers to the implementation of the key recommendations of two clinical practice guidelines were discussed. Focus group discussions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Data was analysed by using an existing framework of barriers. RESULTS The barriers varied largely within guidelines, with each key recommendation having a unique pattern of barriers. The most perceived barriers were lack of agreement with the recommendations due to lack of applicability or lack of evidence (68% of key recommendations), environmental factors such as organisational constraints (52%), lack of knowledge regarding the guideline recommendations (46%), and guideline factors such as unclear or ambiguous guideline recommendations (43%). CONCLUSION Our study findings suggest a broad range of barriers. As the barriers largely differ within guidelines, tailored and barrier-driven implementation strategies focusing on key recommendations are needed to improve adherence in practice. In addition, guidelines should be more transparent concerning the underlying evidence and applicability, and further efforts are needed to address complex issues such as comorbidity in guidelines. Finally, it might be useful to include focus groups in continuing medical education as an innovative medium for guideline education and implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marjolein Lugtenberg
- Scientific Centre for Transformation in Care and Welfare (Tranzo), Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Judith M Zegers-van Schaick
- Scientific Centre for Transformation in Care and Welfare (Tranzo), Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands
- Amphia hospital, Department of Cardiology, PO Box 90158, 4800 RK, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Gert P Westert
- Scientific Centre for Transformation in Care and Welfare (Tranzo), Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Jako S Burgers
- Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), University Medical Centre St. Radboud, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
59
|
Côté AM, Durand MJ, Tousignant M, Poitras S. Physiotherapists and use of low back pain guidelines: a qualitative study of the barriers and facilitators. JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL REHABILITATION 2009; 19:94-105. [PMID: 19219536 DOI: 10.1007/s10926-009-9167-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2008] [Accepted: 01/27/2009] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION A new set of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of low back pain (LBP) and prevention of persistent disability entitled "Clinic on Low back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice" (CLIP) was developed in the province of Quebec, Canada. The literature shows that simply disseminating CPGs does not necessarily lead to their adoption by clinicians. To improve adherence to CPGs among healthcare professionals, the literature suggests that there is a need to identify and address the factors impeding or facilitating their use. The aim of this study was therefore to identify the barriers to and facilitators of CLIP CPG use, as perceived by physiotherapists (PTs). METHODS A descriptive study using a qualitative method was conducted with a sample of 16 PTs from a variety of professional backgrounds. Each participant used the CPGs over a 6-week period with two patients suffering from LBP, and then participated in a semi-structured interview in which he or she was asked to identify the barriers and facilitators experienced. RESULTS The participating PTs identified many barriers and facilitators pertaining to the guidelines themselves, the users and the environment. Four key nodes emerged from these barriers and facilitators during data analysis. It appears that the clinicians' understanding of the CPGs, the level of compatibility between their practices and the CLIP CPG recommendations, the level of CPG relevance as perceived by the clinicians, and their level of agreement with the CPGs, all affected their use of the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS In order to increase CLIP CPG use, the implementation strategy to be developed should take into account the barriers and facilitators that were identified in this study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne-Marie Côté
- School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12th Avenue North, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
60
|
Chumlea WC. Editorial: translational medicine, a new topic area of clinical and health importance. J Nutr Health Aging 2008; 12:743S-744S. [PMID: 19043650 DOI: 10.1007/bf03028623] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/29/2022]
|
61
|
Légaré F, Ratté S, Gravel K, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2008; 73:526-35. [PMID: 18752915 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 816] [Impact Index Per Article: 51.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2008] [Revised: 06/29/2008] [Accepted: 07/04/2008] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To update a systematic review on the barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice as perceived by health professionals. METHODS From March to December 2006, PubMed, Embase, CINHAL, PsycINFO, and Dissertation Abstracts were searched. Studies were included if they reported on health professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in practice. Quality of the included studies was assessed. Content analysis was performed with a pre-established taxonomy. RESULTS Out of 1130 titles, 10 new eligible studies were identified for a total of 38 included studies compared to 28 in the previous version. The vast majority of participants (n=3231) were physicians (89%). The three most often reported barriers were: time constraints (22/38) and lack of applicability due to patient characteristics (18/38) and the clinical situation (16/38). The three most often reported facilitators were: provider motivation (23/38) and positive impact on the clinical process (16/38) and patient outcomes (16/38). CONCLUSION This systematic review update confirms the results of the original review. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Interventions to foster implementation of shared decision-making in clinical practice will need to address a range of factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- France Légaré
- Research Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Quebec, Canada.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
62
|
Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJE, Mistiaen P. Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2008; 8:38. [PMID: 18789150 PMCID: PMC2551591 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-38] [Citation(s) in RCA: 745] [Impact Index Per Article: 46.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2008] [Accepted: 09/12/2008] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nowadays more and more clinical guidelines for health care professionals are being developed. However, this does not automatically mean that these guidelines are actually implemented. The aim of this meta-review is twofold: firstly, to gain a better understanding of which factors affect the implementation of guidelines, and secondly, to provide insight into the "state-of-the-art" regarding research within this field. METHODS A search of five literature databases and one website was performed to find relevant existing systematic reviews or meta-reviews. Subsequently, a two-step inclusion process was conducted: (1) screening on the basis of references and abstracts and (2) screening based on full-text papers. After that, relevant data from the included reviews were extracted and the methodological quality of the reviews was assessed by using the Quality Assessment Checklist for Reviews. RESULTS Twelve systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. No previous systematic meta-reviews meeting all our inclusion criteria were found. Two of the twelve reviews scored high on the checklist used, indicating only "minimal" or "minor flaws". The other ten reviews scored in the lowest of middle ranges, indicating "extensive" or "major" flaws. A substantial proportion (although not all) of the reviews indicates that effective strategies often have multiple components and that the use of one single strategy, such as reminders only or an educational intervention, is less effective. Besides, characteristics of the guidelines themselves affect actual use. For instance, guidelines that are easy to understand, can easily be tried out, and do not require specific resources, have a greater chance of implementation. In addition, characteristics of professionals - e.g., awareness of the existence of the guideline and familiarity with its content - likewise affect implementation. Furthermore, patient characteristics appear to exert influence: for instance, co-morbidity reduces the chance that guidelines are followed. Finally, environmental characteristics may influence guideline implementation. For example, a lack of support from peers or superiors, as well as insufficient staff and time, appear to be the main impediments. CONCLUSION Existing reviews describe various factors that influence whether guidelines are actually used. However, the evidence base is still thin, and future sound research - for instance comparing combinations of implementation strategies versus single strategies - is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anneke L Francke
- NIVEL - Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, PO Box 1568, 3500 BN Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
63
|
Fullen BM, Doody C, David Baxter G, Daly LE, Hurley DA. Chronic low back pain: non-clinical factors impacting on management by Irish doctors. Ir J Med Sci 2008; 177:257-63. [PMID: 18584269 DOI: 10.1007/s11845-008-0174-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2007] [Accepted: 05/23/2008] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION General practitioners and consultants in the Republic of Ireland manage patients with chronic low back pain (LBP), but little is known about the non-clinical factors that impact on their management. AIM To establish the non-clinical factors that impact on the management of chronic LBP by a cohort of general practitioners and consultants. METHODS Using a multiple case study design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with general practitioners (n = 7) and consultants (n = 7). Interviews were transcribed and analysed qualitatively. RESULTS Two main themes emerged: policy factors (the health care system, the medico-legal system), and patient factors (need for reassurance, lack of patient adherence). CONCLUSIONS These factors operate at national and local levels. Nationally, they underscore the lack of resources, and the impact of the medico-legal system. Local issues include changing practice by reassuring patients using evidence-based biopsychosocial strategies to maximise patient care and reduce healthcare costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B M Fullen
- School of Physiotherapy and Performance Science, Health Science Centre, University College Dublin, Dublin, Republic of Ireland.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
64
|
Poitras S, Rossignol M, Dionne C, Tousignant M, Truchon M, Arsenault B, Allard P, Coté M, Neveu A. An interdisciplinary clinical practice model for the management of low-back pain in primary care: the CLIP project. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008; 9:54. [PMID: 18426590 PMCID: PMC2390556 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-9-54] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2007] [Accepted: 04/21/2008] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low-back pain is responsible for significant disability and costs in industrialized countries. Only a minority of subjects suffering from low-back pain will develop persistent disability. However, this minority is responsible for the majority of costs and has the poorest health outcomes. The objective of the Clinic on Low-back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice (CLIP) project was to develop a primary care interdisciplinary practice model for the clinical management of low-back pain and the prevention of persistent disability. METHODS Using previously published guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, a clinical management model for low-back pain was developed by the project team. A structured process facilitating discussions on this model among researchers, stakeholders and clinicians was created. The model was revised following these exchanges, without deviating from the evidence. RESULTS A model consisting of nine elements on clinical management of low-back pain and prevention of persistent disability was developed. The model's two core elements for the prevention of persistent disability are the following: 1) the evaluation of the prognosis at the fourth week of disability, and of key modifiable barriers to return to usual activities if the prognosis is unfavourable; 2) the evaluation of the patient's perceived disability every four weeks, with the evaluation and management of barriers to return to usual activities if perceived disability has not sufficiently improved. CONCLUSION A primary care interdisciplinary model aimed at improving quality and continuity of care for patients with low-back pain was developed. The effectiveness, efficiency and applicability of the CLIP model in preventing persistent disability in patients suffering from low-back pain should be assessed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stéphane Poitras
- Montreal Department of Public Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Michel Rossignol
- Montreal Department of Public Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Clermont Dionne
- Department of Rehabilitation, Laval University, Quebec City, Canada
| | - Michel Tousignant
- Department of Rehabilitation, Sherbrooke University, Sherbrooke, Canada
| | - Manon Truchon
- Department of Industrial Relations, Laval University, Quebec City, Canada
| | | | - Pierre Allard
- Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada
| | - Manon Coté
- Jewish Rehabilitation Hospital, Montreal, Canada
| | - Alain Neveu
- Constance Lethbridge Rehabilitation Centre, Montreal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
65
|
Espeland A, Natvig NL, Løge I, Engebretsen L, Ellingsen J. Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee in Norway 2002-2004 (national survey): rapid increase, older patients, large geographic differences. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 7:115. [PMID: 17659090 PMCID: PMC1959197 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2006] [Accepted: 07/22/2007] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee is the second most common MRI examination in Norway after head/brain MRI. Little has been published internationally on trends in the use of knee MRI after 1999. This study aimed to describe levels and trends in ambulant knee MRI utilisation in Norway 2002–2004 in relation to type of radiology service, geographic regions, number of MRI-scanners, patient age and gender, and type of referring health care provider. Methods We analysed administrative data on all claims for reimbursement of ambulant knee MRI performed in Norway in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and noted nominal reimbursement. We also recorded the referring health care provider from clinical requests of ambulant knee MRI done consecutively during two months in 2004 at one private institute and three hospitals. Number of MRI-scanners was given by manufacturers and radiology services. Results In Norway, the rate of knee MRI claims for 2004 was 15.6 per 1000 persons. This rate was 74% higher in East than in North region (18.4 vs. 10.6), slightly higher for men than women (16.4 vs. 14.7) and highest for ages 50–59 years (29.0) and 60–69 years (21.2). Most claims (76% for 2004) came from private radiology services. In 2004, the referring health care provider was a general practitioner in 63% of claims (unspecified in 24%) and in 83.5% (394/472) of clinical requests. From 2002 to 2004, the rate of knee MRI claims increased 64%. In the age group 50 years or above the increase was 86%. Rate of MRI-scanners increased 43% to 21 scanners per million persons in 2004. Reimbursement for knee MRI claims (nominal value) increased 80% to 70 million Norwegian kroner in 2004. Conclusion Ambulant knee MRI utilisation in Norway increases rapidly especially for patients over 50, and shows large geographic differences. Evaluation of clinical outcomes of this activity is needed together with clinical guidelines for use of knee MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ansgar Espeland
- Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, N-5021 Bergen, Norway
- Section for Radiology, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Bergen, Haukeland University Hospital, N-5021 Bergen, Norway
| | - Nils L Natvig
- Department of Radiology, Sykehuset Buskerud HF (Buskerud Hospital Trust), Dronninggt. 28, N-3004 Drammen, Norway
| | - Ingard Løge
- Edda Legesenter, Eirik Jarls gt. 14, N-7030 Trondheim, Norway
| | - Lars Engebretsen
- Department of Orthopaedics, Ullevål University Hospital, N-0407 Oslo, Norway
| | - Jostein Ellingsen
- Department of Statistics and Research, Directorate of Labour and Welfare, the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Organisation (NAV), Postboks 5, St. Olavs Plass, N-0130 Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
66
|
Whiting P, Toerien M, de Salis I, Sterne JAC, Dieppe P, Egger M, Fahey T. A review identifies and classifies reasons for ordering diagnostic tests. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60:981-9. [PMID: 17884591 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2006] [Revised: 12/20/2006] [Accepted: 01/19/2007] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To consider the reasons and context for test ordering by doctors when faced with an undiagnosed complaint in primary or secondary care. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We reviewed any study of any design that discussed factors that may affect a doctor's decision to order a test. Articles were located through searches of electronic databases, authors' files on diagnostic methodology, and reference lists of relevant studies. We extracted data on: study design, type of analysis, setting, topic area, and any factors reported to influence test ordering. RESULTS We included 37 studies. We carried out a thematic analysis to synthesize data. Five key groupings arose from this process: diagnostic factors, therapeutic and prognostic factors, patient-related factors, doctor-related factors, and policy and organization-related factors. To illustrate how the various factors identified may influence test ordering we considered the symptom low back pain and the diagnosis multiple sclerosis as examples. CONCLUSIONS A wide variety of factors influence a doctor's decision to order a test. These are integral to understanding diagnosis in clinical practice. Traditional diagnostic accuracy studies should be supplemented with research into the broader context in which doctors perform their work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penny Whiting
- MRC Health Services Research Collaboration, Department of Social Medicine, Canynge Hall, Whiteladies Road, Bristol BS8 2PR, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
67
|
Billis EV, McCarthy CJ, Stathopoulos I, Kapreli E, Pantzou P, Oldham JA. The clinical and cultural factors in classifying low back pain patients within Greece: a qualitative exploration of Greek health professionals. J Eval Clin Pract 2007; 13:337-45. [PMID: 17518796 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00698.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Identifying homogenous subgroups of low back pain (LBP) patients is considered a priority in musculoskeletal rehabilitation and is believed to enhance clinical outcomes. In order to achieve this, the specific features of each subgroup need to be identified. The aim of this study was to develop a list of clinical and cultural features that are included in the assessment of LBP patients in Greece, among health professionals. This 'list' will be, utilized in a clinical study for developing LBP subgroups. METHODS Three focus groups were conducted, each one comprising health professionals with homogenous characteristics and all coordinated by a single moderator. There were: 11 physiotherapists (PTs) with clinical experience in LBP patients, seven PTs specialized in LBP management, and five doctors with a particular spinal interest. The focus of discussions was to develop a list of clinical and cultural features that were important in the examination of LBP. Content analysis was performed by two researchers. RESULTS Clinicians and postgraduates developed five categories within the History (Present Symptoms, History of Symptoms, Function, Psychosocial, Medical History) and six categories within the Physical Examination (Observation, Neurological Examination, Active and Passive Movements, Muscle Features and Palpation). The doctors identified four categories in History (Symptomatology, Function, Psychosocial, Medical History) and an additional in Physical Examination (Special Tests). All groups identified three cultural categories; Attitudes of Health Professionals, Patients' Attitudes and Health System influences. CONCLUSION An extensive Greek 'list' of clinical and cultural features was developed from the groups' analysis. Although similarities existed in most categories, there were several differences across the three focus groups which will be discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evdokia V Billis
- Department of Physiotherapy, Axhool of Health and Caring Professions, Technological Education Institute of Lamia, Lamia, Greece.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
68
|
Grutters JPC, van der Horst F, Joore MA, Verschuure H, Dreschler WA, Anteunis LJC. Potential barriers and facilitators for implementation of an integrated care pathway for hearing-impaired persons: an exploratory survey among patients and professionals. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 7:57. [PMID: 17445260 PMCID: PMC1865538 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-57] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2006] [Accepted: 04/19/2007] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Because of the increasing costs and anticipated shortage of Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) specialists in the care for hearing-impaired persons, an integrated care pathway that includes direct hearing aid provision was developed. While this direct pathway is still under investigation, in a survey we examined expectations and potential barriers and facilitators towards this direct pathway, of patients and professionals involved in the pathway. Methods Two study populations were assessed: members of the health professions involved in the care pathway for hearing-impaired persons (general practitioners (GPs), hearing aid dispensers, ENT-specialists and clinical audiologists) and persons with hearing complaints. We developed a comprehensive semi-structured questionnaire for the professionals, regarding expectations, barriers, facilitators and conditions for implementation. We developed two questionnaires for persons with hearing complaints, both regarding evaluations and preferences, and administered them after they had experienced two key elements of the direct pathway: the triage and the hearing aid fitting. Results On average GPs and hearing aid dispensers had positive expectations towards the direct pathway, while ENT-specialists and clinical audiologists had negative expectations. Professionals stated both barriers and facilitators towards the direct pathway. Most professionals either supported implementation of the direct pathway, provided that a number of conditions were satisfied, or did not support implementation, unless roughly the same conditions were satisfied. Professionals generally agreed on which conditions need to be satisfied. Persons with hearing complaints evaluated the present referral pathway and the new direct pathway equally. Many, especially older, participants stated however that they would still visit the GP and ENT-specialist, even when this would not be necessary for reimbursement of the hearing aid, and found it important that the ENT-specialist or Audiological Centre evaluated their hearing aid. Conclusion This study identified professional concerns about the direct pathway for hearing-impaired persons. Gaps exist in expectations amongst professions. Also gaps exist between users of the pathway, especially between age groups and regions. Professionals are united in the conditions that need to be fulfilled for a successful implementation of the direct pathway. Implementation on a regional level is recommended to best satisfy these conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janneke PC Grutters
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, University Hospital Maastricht, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Frans van der Horst
- Department of General Practice, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Manuela A Joore
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, University Hospital Maastricht, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Hans Verschuure
- Audiological Center, Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter A Dreschler
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Audiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lucien JC Anteunis
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
69
|
Billis EV, McCarthy CJ, Oldham JA. Subclassification of low back pain: a cross-country comparison. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2007; 16:865-79. [PMID: 17576604 PMCID: PMC2219658 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-007-0313-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2006] [Revised: 12/31/2006] [Accepted: 01/05/2007] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
Various health professionals have attempted to classify low back pain (LBP) subgroups and have developed several LBP classification systems. Knowing that culture has an effect on LBP symptomatology, assessment findings and clinical decision making, the aim of this review is to perform a cross-country comparative review amongst the published classification systems, addressing each country's similarities and differences as well as exploring whether cultural factors have been incorporated into the subclassification process. A systematic search of databases limited to human adults was undertaken by Medline, Cinahl, AMED and PEDro databases between January 1980 and October 2005. Classification systems from nine countries were identified. Most studies were classified according to pathoanatomic and/or clinical features, whereas fewer studies utilized a psychosocial and even less, a biopsychosocial approach. Most studies were limited in use to the country of the system's developer. Very few studies addressed cultural issues, highlighting the lack of information on the impact of specific cultural factors on LBP classification procedures. However, there seem to be certain 'cultural trends' in classification systems within each country, which are discussed. Despite the plethora of classification studies, there is still no system which is internationally established, effective, reliable and valid. Future research should aim to develop a LBP classification system within a well identified cultural setting, addressing the multi-dimensional features of the LBP presentation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evdokia V Billis
- Department of Physiotherapy, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Lamia, Lamia, Fthiotida, Greece.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
70
|
Espeland A, Baerheim A. General practitioners' views on radiology reports of plain radiography for back pain. Scand J Prim Health Care 2007; 25:15-9. [PMID: 17354154 PMCID: PMC3389447 DOI: 10.1080/02813430600973459] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify and describe general practitioners' (GPs') views on radiology reports, using plain radiography for back pain as the case. DESIGN Qualitative study with three focus-group interviews analysed using Giorgi's method as modified by Malterud. SETTING Southern Norway. SUBJECTS Five female and eight male GPs aged 32-57 years who had practised for 3-15 years and were from 11 different practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Descriptions of GPs' views. RESULTS GPs wanted radiology reports to indicate more clearly the meaning of radiological terminology, the likelihood of disease, the clinical relevance of the findings, and/or the need for further investigations. GPs stated that good referral information leads to better reports. CONCLUSION These results can help to improve communication between radiologists and GPs. The issues identified in this study could be further investigated in studies that can quantify GPs' satisfaction with radiology reports in relation to characteristics of the GP, the radiologist, and the referral information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ansgar Espeland
- Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital and Section for Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
| | | |
Collapse
|
71
|
Lysdahl KB, Børretzen I. Geographical variation in radiological services: a nationwide survey. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 7:21. [PMID: 17302970 PMCID: PMC1805434 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2006] [Accepted: 02/15/2007] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Geographical variation in health care services challenges the basic principle of fair allocation of health care resources. This study aimed to investigate geographical variation in the use of X-ray, CT, MRI and Ultrasound examinations in Norway, the contribution from public and private institutions, and the impact of accessibility and socioeconomic factors on variation in examination rates. Methods A nationwide survey of activity in all radiological institutions for the year 2002 was used to compare the rates per thousand of examinations in the counties. The data format was files/printouts where the examinations were recorded according to a code system. Results Overall rates per thousand of radiological examinations varied by a factor of 2.4. The use of MRI varied from 170 to 2, and CT from 216 to 56 examinations per 1000 inhabitants. Single MRI examinations (knee, cervical spine and head/brain) ranged high in variation, as did certain other spine examinations. For examination of specific organs, the counties' use of one modality was positively correlated with the use of other modalities. Private institutions accounted for 28% of all examinations, and tended towards performing a higher proportion of single examinations with high variability. Indicators of accessibility correlated positively to variation in examination rates, partly due to the figures from the county of Oslo. Correlations between examination rates and socioeconomic factors were also highly influenced by the figures from this county. Conclusion The counties use of radiological services varied substantially, especially CT and MRI examinations. A likely cause of the variation is differences in accessibility. The coexistence of public and private institutions may be a source of variability, along with socioeconomic factors. The findings represent a challenge to the objective of equality in access to health care services, and indicate a potential for better allocation of overall health care resources. Previous publication The data applied in this article was originally published in Norwegian in: Børretzen I, Lysdahl KB, Olerud HM: Radiologi i Noreg – undersøkingsfrekvens per 2002, tidstrendar, geografisk variasjon og befolkningsdose. StrålevernRapport 2006:6. Østerås: The Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority. The Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority has given the authors permission to republish the data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin Bakke Lysdahl
- Radiography Programme, Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo University College, P.O. Box 4, St. Olavs plass, NO-0130 Oslo/Section for Medical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1130, Blindern, NO-0318 Oslo, Norway
| | - Ingelin Børretzen
- Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, P.O. Box 55, NO-1332 Østeraas, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
72
|
Légaré F, O'Connor AM, Graham ID, Saucier D, Côté L, Blais J, Cauchon M, Paré L. Primary health care professionals' views on barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework in practice. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2006; 63:380-90. [PMID: 17010555 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.04.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2006] [Revised: 04/24/2006] [Accepted: 04/25/2006] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe primary health care professionals' views on barriers and facilitators for implementing the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) in their practice. METHODS Thirteen focus groups with 118 primary health care professionals were performed. A taxonomy of barriers and facilitators to implementing clinical practice guidelines was used to content-analyse the following sources: reports from each workshop, field notes from the principal investigator and written materials collected from the participants. RESULTS Applicability of the ODSF to the practice population, process outcome expectation, asking patients about their preferred role in decision making, perception that the ODSF was modifiable, time issues, familiarity with the ODSF and its practicability were the most frequently identified both as barriers as well as facilitators. Forgetting about the ODSF, interpretation of evidence, challenge to autonomy and total lack of agreement with using the ODSF in general were identified only as barriers. Asking about values, health professional's outcome expectation, compatibility with the patient-centered approach or the evidence-based approach, ease of understanding and implementation, and ease of communicating the ODSF were identified only as facilitators. CONCLUSION These results provide insight on the type of interventions that could be developed in order to implement the ODSF in academic primary care practice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Interventions to implement the ODSF in primary care practice will need to address a broad range of factors at the levels of the health professionals, the patients and the health care system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- France Légaré
- Department of Family Medicine, Université Laval and Research center of Centre Hospitalier, Universitaire de Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
73
|
Balagué F, Cedraschi C. Radiological examination in low back pain patients: Anxiety of the patient? Anxiety of the therapist? Joint Bone Spine 2006; 73:508-13. [PMID: 16563842 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2006.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2005] [Accepted: 09/27/2005] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
A review of the recent literature shows that guidelines on the management of low back pain (LBP) have little impact on the use of radiological imagery. Among the factors which might account for the use of radiological examination, a review of the literature points to some that refer to the patient, others to the clinician and still others to the therapeutic interaction. This leads one to question the importance of radiological examination for both the patient and the physician. The matter at stake in this review is the relationship that may exist between this type of examination and the patient's and/or the physician's anxiety. If these aspects are associated or causally related, this relationship can be two-sided and is thus susceptible to affect the patient, the physician, or both. Some possible keys which emphasize the central role of the therapeutic relationship in this predicament are also reviewed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federico Balagué
- Clinic of Rheumatology and Service of Physical Medicine and Reeducation, Fribourg Cantonal Hospital, 1708 Fribourg, Switzerland.
| | | |
Collapse
|
74
|
Gravel K, Légaré F, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. Implement Sci 2006; 1:16. [PMID: 16899124 PMCID: PMC1586024 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-16] [Citation(s) in RCA: 472] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2006] [Accepted: 08/09/2006] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shared decision-making is advocated because of its potential to improve the quality of the decision-making process for patients and ultimately, patient outcomes. However, current evidence suggests that shared decision-making has not yet been widely adopted by health professionals. Therefore, a systematic review was performed on the barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice as perceived by health professionals. METHODS Covering the period from 1990 to March 2006, PubMed, Embase, CINHAL, PsycINFO, and Dissertation Abstracts were searched for studies in English or French. The references from included studies also were consulted. Studies were included if they reported on health professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in their practices. Shared decision-making was defined as a joint process of decision making between health professionals and patients, or as decision support interventions including decision aids, or as the active participation of patients in decision making. No study design was excluded. Quality of the studies included was assessed independently by two of the authors. Using a pre-established taxonomy of barriers and facilitators to implementing clinical practice guidelines in practice, content analysis was performed. RESULTS Thirty-one publications covering 28 unique studies were included. Eleven studies were from the UK, eight from the USA, four from Canada, two from The Netherlands, and one from each of the following countries: France, Mexico, and Australia. Most of the studies used qualitative methods exclusively (18/28). Overall, the vast majority of participants (n = 2784) were physicians (89%). The three most often reported barriers were: time constraints (18/28), lack of applicability due to patient characteristics (12/28), and lack of applicability due to the clinical situation (12/28). The three most often reported facilitators were: provider motivation (15/28), positive impact on the clinical process (11/28), and positive impact on patient outcomes (10/28). CONCLUSION This systematic review reveals that interventions to foster implementation of shared decision-making in clinical practice will need to address a broad range of factors. It also reveals that on this subject there is very little known about any health professionals others than physicians. Future studies about implementation of shared decision-making should target a more diverse group of health professionals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karine Gravel
- Research Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - France Légaré
- Research Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Québec, Canada
- Department of Family Medicine, Université Laval, Québec, Canada
| | - Ian D Graham
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
75
|
Baker R, Lecouturier J, Bond S. Explaining variation in GP referral rates for x-rays for back pain. Implement Sci 2006; 1:15. [PMID: 16884536 PMCID: PMC1570475 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2005] [Accepted: 08/02/2006] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the availability of clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain (LBP), there continues to be wide variation in general practitioners' (GPs') referral rates for lumbar spine x-ray (LSX). This study aims to explain variation in GPs' referral rates for LSX from their accounts of the management of patients with low back pain. METHODS Qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 29 GPs with high and low referral rates for LSX in North East England. Thematic analysis used constant comparative techniques. RESULTS Common and divergent themes were identified among high- and low-users of LSX. Themes that were similar in both groups included an awareness of current guidelines for the use of LSX for patients with LBP and the pressure from patients and institutional factors to order a LSX. Differentiating themes for the high-user group included: a belief that LSX provides reassurance to patients that can outweigh risks, pessimism about the management options for LBP, and a belief that denying LSX would adversely affect doctor-patient relationships. Two specific differentiating themes are considered in more depth: GPs' awareness of their use of lumbar spine radiology relative to others, and the perceived risks associated with LSX radiation. CONCLUSION Several key factors differentiate the accounts of GPs who have high and low rates of referral for LSX, even though they are aware of clinical guideline recommendations. Intervention studies that aim to increase adherence to guideline recommendations on the use of LSX by changing the ordering behaviour of practitioners in primary care should focus on these factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Baker
- School of Population and Health Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Jan Lecouturier
- School of Population and Health Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Senga Bond
- School of Population and Health Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
76
|
Nilsen S, Baerheim A. Feedback on video recorded consultations in medical teaching: why students loathe and love it - a focus-group based qualitative study. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION 2005; 5:28. [PMID: 16029509 PMCID: PMC1190180 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-5-28] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2005] [Accepted: 07/19/2005] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Feedback on videotaped consultations is a useful way to enhance consultation skills among medical students. The method is becoming increasingly common, but is still not widely implemented in medical education. One obstacle might be that many students seem to consider this educational approach a stressful experience and are reluctant to participate. In order to improve the process and make it more acceptable to the participants, we wanted to identify possible problems experienced by students when making and receiving feedback on their video taped consultations. METHODS Nineteen of 75 students at the University of Bergen, Norway, participating in a consultation course in their final term of medical school underwent focus group interviews immediately following a video-based feedback session. The material was audio-taped, transcribed, and analysed by phenomenological qualitative analysis. RESULTS The study uncovered that some students experienced emotional distress before the start of the course. They were apprehensive and lacking in confidence, expressing fear about exposing lack of skills and competence in front of each other. The video evaluation session and feedback process were evaluated positively however, and they found that their worries had been exaggerated. The video evaluation process also seemed to help strengthen the students' self esteem and self-confidence, and they welcomed this. CONCLUSION Our study provides insight regarding the vulnerability of students receiving feedback from videotaped consultations and their need for reassurance and support in the process, and demonstrates the importance of carefully considering the design and execution of such educational programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stein Nilsen
- Section for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, N-5009 Bergen, Norway
| | - Anders Baerheim
- Section for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, N-5009 Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|