1
|
Sykes M, Rosenberg-Yunger ZRS, Quigley M, Gupta L, Thomas O, Robinson L, Caulfield K, Ivers N, Alderson S. Exploring the content and delivery of feedback facilitation co-interventions: a systematic review. Implement Sci 2024; 19:37. [PMID: 38807219 PMCID: PMC11134935 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-024-01365-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2024] [Indexed: 05/30/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policymakers and researchers recommend supporting the capabilities of feedback recipients to increase the quality of care. There are different ways to support capabilities. We aimed to describe the content and delivery of feedback facilitation interventions delivered alongside audit and feedback within randomised controlled trials. METHODS We included papers describing feedback facilitation identified by the latest Cochrane review of audit and feedback. The piloted extraction proforma was based upon a framework to describe intervention content, with additional prompts relating to the identification of influences, selection of improvement actions and consideration of priorities and implications. We describe the content and delivery graphically, statistically and narratively. RESULTS We reviewed 146 papers describing 104 feedback facilitation interventions. Across included studies, feedback facilitation contained 26 different implementation strategies. There was a median of three implementation strategies per intervention and evidence that the number of strategies per intervention is increasing. Theory was used in 35 trials, although the precise role of theory was poorly described. Ten studies provided a logic model and six of these described their mechanisms of action. Both the exploration of influences and the selection of improvement actions were described in 46 of the feedback facilitation interventions; we describe who undertook this tailoring work. Exploring dose, there was large variation in duration (15-1800 min), frequency (1 to 42 times) and number of recipients per site (1 to 135). There were important gaps in reporting, but some evidence that reporting is improving over time. CONCLUSIONS Heterogeneity in the design of feedback facilitation needs to be considered when assessing the intervention's effectiveness. We describe explicit feedback facilitation choices for future intervention developers based upon choices made to date. We found the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change to be valuable when describing intervention components, with the potential for some minor clarifications in terms and for greater specificity by intervention providers. Reporting demonstrated extensive gaps which hinder both replication and learning. Feedback facilitation providers are recommended to close reporting gaps that hinder replication. Future work should seek to address the 'opportunity' for improvement activity, defined as factors that lie outside the individual that make care or improvement behaviour possible. REVIEW REGISTRATION The study protocol was published at: https://www.protocols.io/private/4DA5DE33B68E11ED9EF70A58A9FEAC02 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Lisa Robinson
- Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Karen Caulfield
- Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pinnock H, Noble M, Lo D, McClatchey K, Marsh V, Hui CY. Personalised management and supporting individuals to live with their asthma in a primary care setting. Expert Rev Respir Med 2023; 17:577-596. [PMID: 37535011 DOI: 10.1080/17476348.2023.2241357] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/24/2023] [Indexed: 08/04/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Complementing recognition of biomedical phenotypes, a primary care approach to asthma care recognizes diversity of disease, health beliefs, and lifestyle at a population and individual level. AREAS COVERED We review six aspects of personalized care particularly pertinent to primary care management of asthma: personalizing support for individuals living with asthma; targeting asthma care within populations; managing phenotypes of wheezy pre-school children; personalizing management to the individual; meeting individual preferences for provision of asthma care; optimizing digital approaches to enhance personalized care. EXPERT OPINION In a primary care setting, personalized management and supporting individuals to live with asthma extend beyond the contemporary concepts of biological phenotypes and pharmacological 'treatable traits' to encompass evidence-based tailored support for self-management, and delivery of patient-centered care including motivational interviewing. It extends to how we organize clinical practiceand the choices provided in mode of consultation. Diagnostic uncertainty due to recognition of phenotypes of pre-school wheeze remains a challenge for primary care. Digital health can support personalized management, but there are concerns about increasing inequities. This broad approach reflects the traditionally holistic ethos of primary care ('knowing their patients and understanding their communities'), but the core concepts resonate with all healthcare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hilary Pinnock
- Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- Whitstable Medical Practice, Whitstable, Kent, UK
| | - Mike Noble
- Primary Care Research Group, Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
- Acle Medical Centre, Norfolk, UK
| | - David Lo
- Department of Respiratory Sciences, College of Life Sciences, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (Respiratory Theme), University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
- Department of Paediatric Respiratory Medicine, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK
| | | | - Viv Marsh
- Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- CYP Asthma Transformation Black Country Integrated Care Board, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Chi Yan Hui
- Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- Deanery of Molecular, Genetic and Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- The UK Engineering Council, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mathioudakis AG, Tsilochristou O, Adcock IM, Bikov A, Bjermer L, Clini E, Flood B, Herth F, Horvath I, Kalayci O, Papadopoulos NG, Ryan D, Sanchez Garcia S, Correia-de-Sousa J, Tonia T, Pinnock H, Agache I, Janson C. ERS/EAACI statement on adherence to international adult asthma guidelines. Eur Respir Rev 2021; 30:30/161/210132. [PMID: 34526316 DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0132-2021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2021] [Accepted: 06/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Guidelines aim to standardise and optimise asthma diagnosis and management. Nevertheless, adherence to guidelines is suboptimal and may vary across different healthcare professional (HCP) groups.Further to these concerns, this European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) statement aims to: 1) evaluate the understanding of and adherence to international asthma guidelines by HCPs of different specialties via an international online survey; and 2) assess strategies focused at improving implementation of guideline-recommended interventions, and compare process and clinical outcomes in patients managed by HCPs of different specialties via systematic reviews.The online survey identified discrepancies between HCPs of different specialties which may be due to poor dissemination or lack of knowledge of the guidelines but also a reflection of the adaptations made in different clinical settings, based on available resources. The systematic reviews demonstrated that multifaceted quality improvement initiatives addressing multiple challenges to guidelines adherence are most effective in improving guidelines adherence. Differences in outcomes between patients managed by generalists or specialists should be further evaluated.Guidelines need to consider the heterogeneity of real-life settings for asthma management and tailor their recommendations accordingly. Continuous, multifaceted quality improvement processes are required to optimise and maintain guidelines adherence. Validated referral pathways for uncontrolled asthma or uncertain diagnosis are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander G Mathioudakis
- Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK .,North West Lung Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.,These authors were Task Force Co-chairs and are equal authors
| | - Olympia Tsilochristou
- Dept of Allergy, Guy's and St Thomas' Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Peter Gorer Dept of Immunobiology, King's College London, London, UK.,These authors were Task Force Co-chairs and are equal authors
| | - Ian M Adcock
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London and the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK
| | - Andras Bikov
- Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,North West Lung Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Leif Bjermer
- Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Dept of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Enrico Clini
- Dept of Medical Specialities, University Hospital of Modena, University of Modena-Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | - Breda Flood
- European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients Association (EFA), Dublin, Ireland
| | - Felix Herth
- Dept of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik and Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ildiko Horvath
- National Koranyi Institute for Pulmonology, Budapest, Hungary.,Institute of Public Health, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Omer Kalayci
- Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Nikolaos G Papadopoulos
- Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,Allergy Dept, Paediatric Clinic, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Dermot Ryan
- Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | - Jaime Correia-de-Sousa
- Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.,ICVS/3B's - PT Government Associate Laboratory, Guimarães, Portugal
| | - Thomy Tonia
- Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Hillary Pinnock
- Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Ioana Agache
- Allergy & Clinical Immunology, Transylvania University, Brasov, Romania.,These authors were Task Force Co-chairs and are equal authors
| | - Christer Janson
- Dept of Medical Science, Respiratory, Allergy and Sleep Research, Uppsala University and University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.,These authors were Task Force Co-chairs and are equal authors
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cotterill S, Tang MY, Powell R, Howarth E, McGowan L, Roberts J, Brown B, Rhodes S. Social norms interventions to change clinical behaviour in health workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2020. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr08410] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background
A social norms intervention seeks to change the clinical behaviour of a target health worker by exposing them to the values, beliefs, attitudes or behaviours of a reference group or person. These low-cost interventions can be used to encourage health workers to follow recommended professional practice.
Objective
To summarise evidence on whether or not social norms interventions are effective in encouraging health worker behaviour change, and to identify the most effective social norms interventions.
Design
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Data sources
The following databases were searched on 24 July 2018: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to week 2 July 2018), EMBASE (1974 to 3 July 2018), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1937 to July 2018), British Nursing Index (2008 to July 2018), ISI Web of Science (1900 to present), PsycINFO (1806 to week 3 July 2018) and Cochrane trials (up to July 2018).
Participants
Health workers took part in the study.
Interventions
Behaviour change interventions based on social norms.
Outcome measures
Health worker clinical behaviour, for example prescribing (primary outcome), and patient health outcomes, for example blood test results (secondary), converted into a standardised mean difference.
Methods
Titles and abstracts were reviewed against the inclusion criteria to exclude any that were clearly ineligible. Two reviewers independently screened the remaining full texts to identify relevant papers. Two reviewers extracted data independently, coded for behaviour change techniques and assessed quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We performed a meta-analysis and presented forest plots, stratified by behaviour change technique. Sources of variation were explored using metaregression and network meta-analysis.
Results
A total of 4428 abstracts were screened, 477 full texts were screened and findings were based on 106 studies. Most studies were in primary care or hospitals, targeting prescribing, ordering of tests and communication with patients. The interventions included social comparison (in which information is given on how peers behave) and credible source (which refers to communication from a well-respected person in support of the behaviour). Combined data suggested that interventions that included social norms components were associated with an improvement in health worker behaviour of 0.08 standardised mean differences (95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.10 standardised mean differences) (n = 100 comparisons), and an improvement in patient outcomes of 0.17 standardised mean differences (95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.20) (n = 14), on average. Heterogeneity was high, with an overall I
2 of 85.4% (primary) and 91.5% (secondary). Network meta-analysis suggested that three types of social norms intervention were most effective, on average, compared with control: credible source (0.30 standardised mean differences, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.47); social comparison combined with social reward (0.39 standardised mean differences, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.64); and social comparison combined with prompts and cues (0.33 standardised mean differences, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.44).
Limitations
The large number of studies prevented us from requesting additional information from authors. The trials varied in design, context and setting, and we combined different types of outcome to provide an overall summary of evidence, resulting in a very heterogeneous review.
Conclusions
Social norms interventions are an effective method of changing clinical behaviour in a variety of health service contexts. Although the overall result was modest and very variable, there is the potential for social norms interventions to be scaled up to target the behaviour of a large population of health workers and resulting patient outcomes.
Future work
Development of optimised credible source and social comparison behaviour change interventions, including qualitative research on acceptability and feasibility.
Study registration
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016045718.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Cotterill
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Mei Yee Tang
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Rachael Powell
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Elizabeth Howarth
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Laura McGowan
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Jane Roberts
- Outreach and Evidence Search Service, Library and E-learning Service, Northern Care Alliance, NHS Group, Royal Oldham Hospital, Oldham, UK
| | - Benjamin Brown
- Health e-Research Centre, Farr Institute for Health Informatics Research, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Centre for Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Sarah Rhodes
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gude WT, Brown B, van der Veer SN, Colquhoun HL, Ivers NM, Brehaut JC, Landis-Lewis Z, Armitage CJ, de Keizer NF, Peek N. Clinical performance comparators in audit and feedback: a review of theory and evidence. Implement Sci 2019; 14:39. [PMID: 31014352 PMCID: PMC6480497 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-019-0887-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2019] [Accepted: 04/01/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Audit and feedback (A&F) is a common quality improvement strategy with highly variable effects on patient care. It is unclear how A&F effectiveness can be maximised. Since the core mechanism of action of A&F depends on drawing attention to a discrepancy between actual and desired performance, we aimed to understand current and best practices in the choice of performance comparator. METHODS We described current choices for performance comparators by conducting a secondary review of randomised trials of A&F interventions and identifying the associated mechanisms that might have implications for effective A&F by reviewing theories and empirical studies from a recent qualitative evidence synthesis. RESULTS We found across 146 trials that feedback recipients' performance was most frequently compared against the performance of others (benchmarks; 60.3%). Other comparators included recipients' own performance over time (trends; 9.6%) and target standards (explicit targets; 11.0%), and 13% of trials used a combination of these options. In studies featuring benchmarks, 42% compared against mean performance. Eight (5.5%) trials provided a rationale for using a specific comparator. We distilled mechanisms of each comparator from 12 behavioural theories, 5 randomised trials, and 42 qualitative A&F studies. CONCLUSION Clinical performance comparators in published literature were poorly informed by theory and did not explicitly account for mechanisms reported in qualitative studies. Based on our review, we argue that there is considerable opportunity to improve the design of performance comparators by (1) providing tailored comparisons rather than benchmarking everyone against the mean, (2) limiting the amount of comparators being displayed while providing more comparative information upon request to balance the feedback's credibility and actionability, (3) providing performance trends but not trends alone, and (4) encouraging feedback recipients to set personal, explicit targets guided by relevant information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wouter T. Gude
- Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- NIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Benjamin Brown
- Centre for Health Informatics, Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Sabine N. van der Veer
- NIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Centre for Health Informatics, Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Heather L. Colquhoun
- Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario Canada
| | - Noah M. Ivers
- Family and Community Medicine, Women’s College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario Canada
| | - Jamie C. Brehaut
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
| | - Zach Landis-Lewis
- Center for Health Informatics for the Underserved, Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Christopher J. Armitage
- NIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Nicolette F. de Keizer
- Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Niels Peek
- NIHR Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Centre for Health Informatics, Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Grayling MJ, Wason JMS, Mander AP. Stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial designs: a review of reporting quality and design features. Trials 2017; 18:33. [PMID: 28109321 PMCID: PMC5251280 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-1783-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2016] [Accepted: 01/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The stepped wedge (SW) cluster randomized controlled trial (CRCT) design is being used with increasing frequency. However, there is limited published research on the quality of reporting of SW-CRCTs. We address this issue by conducting a literature review. Methods Medline, Ovid, Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, the ISRCTN registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify investigations employing the SW-CRCT design up to February 2015. For each included completed study, information was extracted on a selection of criteria, based on the CONSORT extension to CRCTs, to assess the quality of reporting. Results A total of 123 studies were included in our review, of which 39 were completed trial reports. The standard of reporting of SW-CRCTs varied in quality. The percentage of trials reporting each criterion varied to as low as 15.4%, with a median of 66.7%. Conclusions There is much room for improvement in the quality of reporting of SW-CRCTs. This is consistent with recent findings for CRCTs. A CONSORT extension for SW-CRCTs is warranted to standardize the reporting of SW-CRCTs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1783-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Grayling
- MRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK.
| | - James M S Wason
- MRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK
| | - Adrian P Mander
- MRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Lavoie KL, Rash JA, Campbell TS. Changing Provider Behavior in the Context of Chronic Disease Management: Focus on Clinical Inertia. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2016; 57:263-283. [PMID: 27618738 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010716-104952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Widespread acceptance of evidence-based medicine has led to the proliferation of clinical practice guidelines as the primary mode of communicating current best practices across a range of chronic diseases. Despite overwhelming evidence supporting the benefits of their use, there is a long history of poor uptake by providers. Nonadherence to clinical practice guidelines is referred to as clinical inertia and represents provider failure to initiate or intensify treatment despite a clear indication to do so. Here we review evidence for the ubiquity of clinical inertia across a variety of chronic health conditions, as well as the organizational and system, patient, and provider factors that serve to maintain it. Limitations are highlighted in the emerging literature examining interventions to reduce clinical inertia. An evidence-based framework to address these limitations is proposed that uses behavior change theory and advocates for shared decision making and enhanced guideline development and dissemination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim L Lavoie
- Department of Psychology, University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM), Montreal, Quebec H3C 3P8, Canada.,Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre (MBMC), Research Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec H2J 1C5, Canada
| | - Joshua A Rash
- Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada;
| | - Tavis S Campbell
- Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada;
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Colquhoun HL, Brehaut JC, Sales A, Ivers N, Grimshaw J, Michie S, Carroll K, Chalifoux M, Eva KW. A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback. Implement Sci 2013; 8:66. [PMID: 23759034 PMCID: PMC3702512 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-66] [Citation(s) in RCA: 132] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2013] [Accepted: 06/04/2013] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Audit and feedback is one of the most widely used and promising interventions in implementation research, yet also one of the most variably effective. Understanding this variability has been limited in part by lack of attention to the theoretical and conceptual basis underlying audit and feedback. Examining the extent of theory use in studies of audit and feedback will yield better understanding of the causal pathways of audit and feedback effectiveness and inform efforts to optimize this important intervention. METHODS A total of 140 studies in the 2012 Cochrane update on audit and feedback interventions were independently reviewed by two investigators. Variables were extracted related to theory use in the study design, measurement, implementation or interpretation. Theory name, associated reference, and the location of theory use as reported in the study were extracted. Theories were organized by type (e.g., education, diffusion, organization, psychology), and theory utilization was classified into seven categories (justification, intervention design, pilot testing, evaluation, predictions, post hoc, other). RESULTS A total of 20 studies (14%) reported use of theory in any aspect of the study design, measurement, implementation or interpretation. In only 13 studies (9%) was a theory reportedly used to inform development of the intervention. A total of 18 different theories across educational, psychological, organizational and diffusion of innovation perspectives were identified. Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations and Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory were the most widely used (3.6% and 3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The explicit use of theory in studies of audit and feedback was rare. A range of theories was found, but not consistency of theory use. Advancing our understanding of audit and feedback will require more attention to theoretically informed studies and intervention design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather L Colquhoun
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Centre for Practice Changing Research, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Jamie C Brehaut
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Centre for Practice Changing Research, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Anne Sales
- Division of Nursing Business and Health Systems, Ann Arbor, MI, 48198, US; and VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Health Services Research and Development, University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA
| | - Noah Ivers
- Women’s College Hospital, Department of Family Medicine, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada
| | - Jeremy Grimshaw
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Centre for Practice Changing Research, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Susan Michie
- Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Kelly Carroll
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Centre for Practice Changing Research, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Mathieu Chalifoux
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Centre for Practice Changing Research, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada
| | - Kevin W Eva
- Centre for Health Education Scholarship, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4E3, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Yawn BP, Bertram S, Kurland M, Wollan P, Graham D, Littlefield D, Smail C, Pace W. Protocol for the asthma tools study: a pragmatic practice-based research network trial. Pragmat Obs Res 2013; 4:7-18. [PMID: 27774020 PMCID: PMC5045012 DOI: 10.2147/por.s43161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Asthma is common among children, adolescents, and adults. However, management of asthma often fails to follow evidence-based guidelines. Control assessments have been developed, validated against expert opinion, and disseminated. However, in primary care, assessment of control is only one step in asthma management. To facilitate integration of the evidence-based guidelines into practice, tools should also guide the next steps in care. The Asthma APGAR tools do just that, incorporating a control assessment as well as assessment of the most common reasons for inadequate and poor control. The Asthma APGAR tool is also linked to a care algorithm based on the 2007 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute asthma guidelines. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of implementation of the Asthma APGAR on patient asthma outcomes in primary care practices. Methods A total of 1400 patients aged 5–60 years with physician-diagnosed asthma are enrolled in 20 practice-based research network (PBRN) practices randomized to intervention or usual care. The primary outcomes are changes in patient self-reported asthma control, asthma-related quality of life, and rates of exacerbations documented in medical records over the 18–24 months of enrollment. Process measures related to implementation of the Asthma APGAR system into daily care will also be assessed using review of medical records. Qualitative assessments will be used to explore barriers to and facilitators for integrating the Asthma APGAR tools into daily practice in primary care. Discussion Data from this pivotal pragmatic study are intended to demonstrate the importance of linking assessment of asthma and management tools to improve asthma-related patient outcomes. The study is an effectiveness trial done in real-world PBRN practices using patient-oriented outcome measures, making it generalizable to the largest possible group of asthma care providers and primary care clinics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara P Yawn
- Department of Research, Olmsted Medical Center, Rochester, MN
| | - Susan Bertram
- Department of Research, Olmsted Medical Center, Rochester, MN
| | - Margary Kurland
- Department of Research, Olmsted Medical Center, Rochester, MN
| | - Peter Wollan
- Department of Research, Olmsted Medical Center, Rochester, MN
| | - Deborah Graham
- National Research Network, American Academy of Family Physicians, Leawood, KS, USA
| | | | - Craig Smail
- National Research Network, American Academy of Family Physicians, Leawood, KS, USA
| | - Wilson Pace
- National Research Network, American Academy of Family Physicians, Leawood, KS, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
McDonnell J, Williams S, Chavannes NH, de Sousa CJ, Fardy HJ, Fletcher M, Stout J, Tomlins R, Yusuf OM, Pinnock H. Effecting change in primary care management of respiratory conditions: a global scoping exercise and literature review of educational interventions to inform the IPCRG's E-Quality initiative. PRIMARY CARE RESPIRATORY JOURNAL : JOURNAL OF THE GENERAL PRACTICE AIRWAYS GROUP 2012; 21:431-6. [PMID: 22875141 PMCID: PMC6548037 DOI: 10.4104/pcrj.2012.00071] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2012] [Accepted: 06/03/2012] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
This discussion paper describes a scoping exercise and literature review commissioned by the International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) to inform their E-Quality programme which seeks to support small-scale educational projects to improve respiratory management in primary care. Our narrative review synthesises information from three sources: publications concerning the global context and health systems development; a literature search of Medline, CINAHL and Cochrane databases; and a series of eight interviews conducted with members of the IPCRG faculty. Educational interventions sit within complex healthcare, economic, and policy contexts. It is essential that any development project considers the local circumstances in terms of economic resources, political circumstances, organisation and administrative capacities, as well as the specific quality issue to be addressed. There is limited evidence (in terms of changed clinician behaviour and/or improved health outcomes) regarding the merits of different educational and quality improvement approaches. Features of educational interventions that were most likely to show some evidence of effectiveness included being carefully designed, multifaceted, engaged health professionals in their learning, provided ongoing support, were sensitive to local circumstances, and delivered in combination with other quality improvement strategies. To be effective, educational interventions must consider the complex healthcare systems within which they operate. The criteria for the IPCRG E-Quality awards thus require applicants not only to describe their proposed educational initiative but also to consider the practical and local barriers to successful implementation, and to propose a robust evaluation in terms of changed clinician behaviour or improved health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juliet McDonnell
- Education Consultant, International Primary Care Respiratory Group, London, UK
| | - Sian Williams
- Executive Officer, International Primary Care Respiratory Group, London, UK
| | - Niels H Chavannes
- Associate Professor, Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Correira Jaime de Sousa
- Assistant Professor, Community Health Department, Life and Health Sciences Research Institute, School of Health Sciences, University of Minho, Portugal
| | - H John Fardy
- General Practitioner and Regional Hospital Academic Leader, Illawarra, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - James Stout
- Professor, Department of Paediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Ron Tomlins
- Adjunct Associate Professor, Discipline of General Practice, Western Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Osman M Yusuf
- Chief Primary Care/GP Trainer and Consultant Allergy and Asthma Specialist, The Allergy and Asthma Institute, Islamabad, Pakistan
| | - Hilary Pinnock
- Reader, Allergy and Respiratory Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, O'Brien MA, Johansen M, Grimshaw J, Oxman AD. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012:CD000259. [PMID: 22696318 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd000259.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1359] [Impact Index Per Article: 113.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Audit and feedback is widely used as a strategy to improve professional practice either on its own or as a component of multifaceted quality improvement interventions. This is based on the belief that healthcare professionals are prompted to modify their practice when given performance feedback showing that their clinical practice is inconsistent with a desirable target. Despite its prevalence as a quality improvement strategy, there remains uncertainty regarding both the effectiveness of audit and feedback in improving healthcare practice and the characteristics of audit and feedback that lead to greater impact. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient outcomes and to examine factors that may explain variation in the effectiveness of audit and feedback. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2010, Issue 4, part of The Cochrane Library. www.thecochranelibrary.com, including the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (searched 10 December 2010); MEDLINE, Ovid (1950 to November Week 3 2010) (searched 09 December 2010); EMBASE, Ovid (1980 to 2010 Week 48) (searched 09 December 2010); CINAHL, Ebsco (1981 to present) (searched 10 December 2010); Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index, ISI Web of Science (1975 to present) (searched 12-15 September 2011). SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as a summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) that reported objectively measured health professional practice or patient outcomes. In the case of multifaceted interventions, only trials in which audit and feedback was considered the core, essential aspect of at least one intervention arm were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS All data were abstracted by two independent review authors. For the primary outcome(s) in each study, we calculated the median absolute risk difference (RD) (adjusted for baseline performance) of compliance with desired practice compliance for dichotomous outcomes and the median percent change relative to the control group for continuous outcomes. Across studies the median effect size was weighted by number of health professionals involved in each study. We investigated the following factors as possible explanations for the variation in the effectiveness of interventions across comparisons: format of feedback, source of feedback, frequency of feedback, instructions for improvement, direction of change required, baseline performance, profession of recipient, and risk of bias within the trial itself. We also conducted exploratory analyses to assess the role of context and the targeted clinical behaviour. Quantitative (meta-regression), visual, and qualitative analyses were undertaken to examine variation in effect size related to these factors. MAIN RESULTS We included and analysed 140 studies for this review. In the main analyses, a total of 108 comparisons from 70 studies compared any intervention in which audit and feedback was a core, essential component to usual care and evaluated effects on professional practice. After excluding studies at high risk of bias, there were 82 comparisons from 49 studies featuring dichotomous outcomes, and the weighted median adjusted RD was a 4.3% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.5% to 16%) absolute increase in healthcare professionals' compliance with desired practice. Across 26 comparisons from 21 studies with continuous outcomes, the weighted median adjusted percent change relative to control was 1.3% (IQR = 1.3% to 28.9%). For patient outcomes, the weighted median RD was -0.4% (IQR -1.3% to 1.6%) for 12 comparisons from six studies reporting dichotomous outcomes and the weighted median percentage change was 17% (IQR 1.5% to 17%) for eight comparisons from five studies reporting continuous outcomes. Multivariable meta-regression indicated that feedback may be more effective when baseline performance is low, the source is a supervisor or colleague, it is provided more than once, it is delivered in both verbal and written formats, and when it includes both explicit targets and an action plan. In addition, the effect size varied based on the clinical behaviour targeted by the intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Audit and feedback generally leads to small but potentially important improvements in professional practice. The effectiveness of audit and feedback seems to depend on baseline performance and how the feedback is provided. Future studies of audit and feedback should directly compare different ways of providing feedback.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noah Ivers
- Department of Family Medicine, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Canada. 2Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services,Oslo,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Medves J, Godfrey C, Turner C, Paterson M, Harrison M, MacKenzie L, Durando P. Systematic review of practice guideline dissemination and implementation strategies for healthcare teams and team-based practice. INT J EVID-BASED HEA 2010; 8:79-89. [PMID: 20923511 DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2010.00166.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
AIM To synthesis the literature relevant to guideline dissemination and implementation strategies for healthcare teams and team-based practice. METHODS Systematic approach utilising Joanna Briggs Institute methods. Two reviewers screened all articles and where there was disagreement, a third reviewer determined inclusion. RESULTS Initial search revealed 12,083 of which 88 met the inclusion criteria. Ten dissemination and implementation strategies identified with distribution of educational materials the most common. Studies were assessed for patient or practitioner outcomes and changes in practice, knowledge and economic outcomes. A descriptive analysis revealed multiple approaches using teams of healthcare providers were reported to have statistically significant results in knowledge, practice and/or outcomes for 72.7% of the studies. CONCLUSION Team-based care using practice guidelines locally adapted can affect positively patient and provider outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Medves
- School of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Medves J, Godfrey C, Turner C, Paterson M, Harrison M, MacKenzie L, Durando P. Systematic review of practice guideline dissemination and implementation strategies for healthcare teams and team-based practice. INT J EVID-BASED HEA 2010. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-6988.2010.00166.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
14
|
Forsetlund L, Bjørndal A, Rashidian A, Jamtvedt G, O'Brien MA, Wolf F, Davis D, Odgaard-Jensen J, Oxman AD. Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; 2009:CD003030. [PMID: 19370580 PMCID: PMC7138253 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd003030.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 649] [Impact Index Per Article: 43.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Educational meetings are widely used for continuing medical education. Previous reviews found that interactive workshops resulted in moderately large improvements in professional practice, whereas didactic sessions did not. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY We updated previous searches by searching the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Trials Register and pending file, from 1999 to March 2006. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials of educational meetings that reported an objective measure of professional practice or healthcare outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Studies with a low or moderate risk of bias and that reported baseline data were included in the primary analysis. They were weighted according to the number of health professionals participating. For each comparison, we calculated the risk difference (RD) for dichotomous outcomes, adjusted for baseline compliance; and for continuous outcomes the percentage change relative to the control group average after the intervention, adjusted for baseline performance. Professional and patient outcomes were analysed separately. We considered 10 factors to explain heterogeneity of effect estimates using weighted meta-regression supplemented by visual analysis of bubble and box plots. MAIN RESULTS In updating the review, 49 new studies were identified for inclusion. A total of 81 trials involving more than 11,000 health professionals are now included in the review. Based on 30 trials (36 comparisons), the median adjusted RD in compliance with desired practice was 6% (interquartile range 1.8 to 15.9) when any intervention in which educational meetings were a component was compared to no intervention. Educational meetings alone had similar effects (median adjusted RD 6%, interquartile range 2.9 to 15.3; based on 21 comparisons in 19 trials). For continuous outcomes the median adjusted percentage change relative to control was 10% (interquartile range 8 to 32%; 5 trials). For patient outcomes the median adjusted RD in achievement of treatment goals was 3.0 (interquartile range 0.1 to 4.0; 5 trials). Based on univariate meta-regression analyses of the 36 comparisons with dichotomous outcomes for professional practice, higher attendance at the educational meetings was associated with larger adjusted RDs (P < 0.01); mixed interactive and didactic education meetings (median adjusted RD 13.6) were more effective than either didactic meetings (RD 6.9) or interactive meetings (RD 3.0). Educational meetings did not appear to be effective for complex behaviours (adjusted RD -0.3) compared to less complex behaviours; they appeared to be less effective for less serious outcomes (RD 2.9) than for more serious outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Educational meetings alone or combined with other interventions, can improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes for the patients. The effect is most likely to be small and similar to other types of continuing medical education, such as audit and feedback, and educational outreach visits. Strategies to increase attendance at educational meetings, using mixed interactive and didactic formats, and focusing on outcomes that are likely to be perceived as serious may increase the effectiveness of educational meetings. Educational meetings alone are not likely to be effective for changing complex behaviours.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise Forsetlund
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, PO Box 7004, St Olavs plass, Oslo, Norway, 0130.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Samoutis GA, Soteriades ES, Stoffers HE, Zachariadou T, Philalithis A, Lionis C. Designing a multifaceted quality improvement intervention in primary care in a country where general practice is seeking recognition: the case of Cyprus. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8:181. [PMID: 18752660 PMCID: PMC2529293 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2008] [Accepted: 08/27/2008] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Quality Improvement Interventions require significant financial investments, and therefore demand careful consideration in their design in order to maximize potential benefits. In this correspondence we present the methodological approach of a multifaceted quality improvement intervention aiming to improve quality of care in primary care, properly tailored for a country such as Cyprus where general practice is currently seeking recognition. Methods Our methodological approach was focused on the design of an open label, community-based intervention controlled trial using all patients from two urban and two rural public primary care centers diagnosed with hypertension and type II diabetes mellitus. The design of our intervention was grounded on a strong theoretical framework that included the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, and the Chronic Care Model, which synthesize evidence-based system changes in accordance with the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action. The primary outcome measure was improvement in the quality of care for two chronic diseases evaluated through specific clinical indicators, as well as the patient satisfaction assessed by the EUROPEP questionnaire and additional personal interviews. Results We designed a multifaceted quality improvement intervention model, supported by a varying degree of scientific evidence, tailored to local needs and specific country characteristics. Overall, the main components of the intervention were the development and adoption of an electronic medical record and the introduction of clinical guidelines for the management of the targeted chronic diseases facilitated by the necessary model of organizational changes. Conclusion Health planners and policy makers need to be aware of the potential use of certain theoretical models and applied methodology as well as inexpensive tools that may be suitably tailored to the local needs, in order to effectively design quality improvement interventions in primary care settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- George A Samoutis
- Clinic of Social and Family Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|