Implementing guidelines for follow-up after surgery with ventilation tube in the tympanic membrane in Norway: a retrospective study

'It is difficult for us to assess the severity!' A qualitative analysis of parents' expectations to postoperative care after ventilation tube surgery

OBJECTIVE

Surgery with ventilation tubes (VT) in children suffering from otitis media with effusion is quite common. However, the knowledge surrounding parents' expectations to the treatment and postoperative care is sparse. The aim of this study was to describe the parents' expectations to VT surgery and postoperative care shortly after surgery.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted based on semi-structured individual interviews with parents recruited from a study where postoperative care was randomized to either an otolaryngologist or the patient's general practitioner (GP). The interviews were conducted within the first weeks after surgery and analyzed by reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 13 parents aged 29-42 years participated in the study. We identified three main themes elucidating parents' expectations to VT surgery and postoperative care: 1) Preconceptions about VT surgery and hearing - most parents expected surgery to restore the child's normal hearing, and some were uncertain about their knowledge of normal hearing and VT treatment; 2) A safety net to ensure hearing and function - it was reassuring if the child received structured postoperative care that secured and notified appointments and had quick access to a specialist if needed; 3) High-quality care - most parents expected the otolaryngologist to provide the highest level of quality of care due to their specialist competence, special equipment and sufficient understanding of the problem to communicate well with parents. Postoperative care by the GP was perceived as incomplete among most parents due to a lack of both specialist competence and access to audiometry.

CONCLUSION

Parents expect postoperative care to safeguard their child as long as needed after VT surgery, and they expect access to high-quality care. Low health literacy among some parents challenges the current method of postoperative care and requires that more emphasis be set on both informing and educating parents regarding hearing and VT treatment.

Palliative care in general practice; a questionnaire study on the GPs role and guideline implementation in Norway

Background

Patients in need of palliative care often want to reside at home. Providing palliative care requires resources and a high level of competence in primary care. The Norwegian guideline for palliative care points to the central role of the regular general practitioner (RGP), specifying a high expected level of competence. Guideline implementation is known to be challenging in primary care. This study investigates adherence to the guideline, the RGPs experience with, and view of their role in palliative care.

Methods

A questionnaire was distributed, by post, to all 246 RGPs in a Norwegian county. Themes of the questionnaire focused on experience with palliative and terminal care, the use of recommended work methods from the guideline, communication with partners, self-reported role in palliative care and confidence in providing palliative care. Data were analyzed descriptively, using SPSS.

Results

Each RGP had few patients needing palliative care, and limited experience with terminal care at home. Limited experience challenged RGPs possibilities to maintain knowledge about palliative care. Their clinical approach was not in agreement with the guideline, but most of them saw themselves as central, and were confident in the provision of palliative care. Rural RGPs saw themselves as more central in this work than their urban colleagues.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated low adherence of the RGPs, to the Norwegian guideline for palliative care. Guideline requirements may not correspond with the methods of general practice, making them difficult to adopt. The RGPs seemed to have too few clinical cases over time to maintain skills at a complex and specialized level. Yet, there seems to be a great potential for the RGP, with the inherent specialist skills of the general practitioner, to be a key worker in the palliative care trajectory.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01426-8.

Treatment for acute bronchiolitis before and after implementation of new national guidelines: a retrospective observational study from primary and secondary care in Oslo, Norway

BACKGROUND

Acute bronchiolitis treatment guidelines changed in Norway in 2013, no longer recommending the use of nebulised epinephrine. We aimed to assess whether these changes were successfully implemented in both primary and secondary care. Secondary aims were to compare the difference in management of acute bronchiolitis patients in primary and secondary care between 2009 and 2017.

METHODS

We retrospectively registered data on demographics, clinical features and management from electronic medical records of all infants (<12 months of age) diagnosed with acute bronchiolitis at a primary care centre (Oslo Accident and Emergency Outpatient Clinic) and a secondary care centre (Oslo University Hospital) in Norway in 2009, 2014 and 2017. All patient records were individually reviewed to ensure data accuracy.

RESULTS

We included 680 (36.3%) patients from primary care and 1195 (63.7%) from secondary care. There was a reduction in the use of nebulised epinephrine from 2009 to 2017 from 66.9% to 16.1% of cases (p<0.001) in primary care and from 59.1% to 4.9% (p<0.001) in secondary care. In parallel, there was an increase in the use of nebulised saline treatment, from 0.8% to 53.8% (p<0.001) in primary care and from 39.3% to 65.3% (p<0.001) in secondary care. The decrease in the use of nebulised racemic epinephrine occurred earlier in secondary care than in primary care; 13.4% vs 56.1%, respectively, in 2014.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the new guidelines on the treatment of acute bronchiolitis was successfully implemented in both primary and secondary care.

Postoperative controls of ventilation tubes in children by general practitioner or otolaryngologist? Study protocol for a multicenter randomized non-inferiority study (The ConVenTu study)

BACKGROUND

Otitis media with effusion is the major cause of acquired hearing problems in children. Some of the affected children need surgery with ventilation tubes in the tympanic membrane to reduce ear complaints and to improve hearing, middle ear function, and health-related quality of life. This is one of the most common ambulatory surgeries performed on children. Postoperative controls are needed to assess that the tubes are functional, to evaluate whether hearing loss has been improved, and to handle potential complications. The follow-up may continue for years and are usually done by otolaryngologists. Nevertheless, there exist no evidence-based guidelines concerning the level of expertise needed for postoperative controls of the ventilation tubes. The aim of this protocol is to describe the ConVenTu study that evaluates whether postoperative controls performed by general practitioners (GPs) represent a safe and sufficient alternative to controls performed by otolaryngologists.

METHODS/DESIGN

Multicenter randomized non-inferiority study conducted in clinical settings in seven hospitals located in Norway. Discharged children with ventilation tubes, aged 3-10 years, are allocated randomly to receive postoperative controls by either an otolaryngologist at the hospital where they had ventilation tube surgery or their regular GP. Study participants are enrolled consecutively until 200 patients are included in each group. Two years after surgery, we will compare the pure tone average of hearing thresholds (primary endpoint) and middle ear function, complication rate, health-related quality of life and the parents' evaluations of the postoperative care (secondary endpoints).

DISCUSSION

This protocol describes the first randomized non-inferiority study of GPs performing postoperative controls after surgery with ventilation tubes. Results from this study may be utilized for deriving evidence-based clinical practice guidelines of the level of postoperative controls after ventilation tube surgery which is safe and sufficient.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02831985 . Registered on 13 July 2016.

General practitioners' preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Interventions aimed at improving guideline adherence should take into account the specific features of the target users; however, it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the different types of interventions. The aim of this paper was to identify GPs' preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence in practice and whether these differ across key guideline recommendations.

METHOD

An electronic survey was conducted among 703 GPs working in the south-western part of the Netherlands. Each survey focused on two of four guidelines: cerebrovascular accident, eye inflammation, thyroid disorders and urinary tract infection. GPs were asked to rate potential interventions in terms of their usefulness in improving guideline adherence in general and for specific key guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

264 GPs (38%) completed the questionnaire. In general, GPs preferred interactive small group meetings (84% rated this as much or very much encouraging), audit and feedback (53%), organizational interventions (50%) and the use of local opinion leaders (50%) as methods for improving guideline adherence. Financial interventions (24%), distribution of educational materials (22%) and big group educational meetings (21%) were of least interest. Some interventions were preferred by GPs irrespective of the specific key recommendations (e.g. audit and feedback), while ratings for other interventions differed across key recommendations (reminders/computer support).

CONCLUSIONS

To implement guidelines, interventions need to be identified that are acceptable and appealing to the target group. GPs seem to have general and recommendation-specific preferences regarding interventions, these should be taken into account when developing plans for guideline implementation to encourage the uptake of guidelines in practice.

Can general practitioners do the follow-ups after surgery with ventilation tubes in the tympanic membrane? Two years audiological data

Background

A university hospital in Mid-Norway has modified their guidelines for follow-up after insertion of ventilation tubes (VTs) in the tympanic membrane, transferring the controls of the healthiest children to general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of these guidelines by exploring audiological outcome and subjective hearing complaints two years after surgery, assessing if follow-ups in general practice resulted in poorer outcome.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed at the university hospital and in general practice in Mid-Norway. Children below 18 years who underwent surgery with VTs between Nov 1st 2007 and Dec 31st 2008 (n = 136) were invited to participate. Pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry and tympanometry were measured. A self-report questionnaire assessed subjective hearing, ear complaints and the location of follow-ups. This study includes enough patients to observe group differences in mean threshold (0.5–1–2–4 kHz) of 9 dB or more.

Results

There were no preoperative differences in audiometry or tympanometry between the children scheduled for follow-ups by GPs (n = 23) or otolaryngologists (n = 50). Two years after surgery there were no differences between the GP and otolaryngologist groups in improvement of mean hearing thresholds (12.8 vs 12.6 dB, p = 0.9) or reduction of middle ears with effusion (78.0 vs 75.0%, p = 0.9). We found no differences between the groups in terms of parental reports of child hearing or ear complaints.

Conclusions

Implementation of new clinical guidelines for follow-ups after insertion of VTs did not negatively affect audiological outcomes or subjective hearing complaints two years after surgery.