Identifying determinants of care for tailoring implementation in chronic diseases: an evaluation of different methods

被引:113
作者
Krause, Jane [1 ]
Van Lieshout, Jan [2 ]
Klomp, Rien [2 ]
Huntink, Elke [2 ]
Aakhus, Eivind [3 ,4 ]
Flottorp, Signe [4 ,5 ]
Jaeger, Cornelia [6 ]
Steinhaeuser, Jost [6 ]
Godycki-Cwirko, Maciek [7 ]
Kowalczyk, Anna [7 ]
Agarwal, Shona [1 ]
Wensing, Michel [2 ]
Baker, Richard [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leicester, Dept Hlth Sci, Leicester LE2 1TP, Leics, England
[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Sci Inst Qual Healthcare, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Innlandet Hosp Trust, Dept Old Age Psychiat, N-2312 Ottestad, Norway
[4] Norwegian Knowledge Ctr Hlth Serv, Oslo, Norway
[5] Univ Bergen, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Healthcare, Bergen, Norway
[6] Heidelberg Univ, Dept Gen Practice & Hlth Serv Res, D-69115 Heidelberg, Germany
[7] Med Univ Lodz, Ctr Family & Community Med, Lodz, Poland
关键词
Chronic disease; Guideline adherence; Quality assurance; Healthcare; PROTOCOL; BARRIERS; RECOMMENDATIONS; INTERVENTION; TICD;
D O I
10.1186/s13012-014-0102-3
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The tailoring of implementation interventions includes the identification of the determinants of, or barriers to, healthcare practice. Different methods for identifying determinants have been used in implementation projects, but which methods are most appropriate to use is unknown. Methods: The study was undertaken in five European countries, recommendations for a different chronic condition being addressed in each country: Germany (polypharmacy in multimorbid patients); the Netherlands (cardiovascular risk management); Norway (depression in the elderly); Poland (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-COPD); and the United Kingdom (UK) (obesity). Using samples of professionals and patients in each country, three methods were compared directly: brainstorming amongst health professionals, interviews of health professionals, and interviews of patients. The additional value of discussion structured through reference to a checklist of determinants in addition to brainstorming, and determinants identified by open questions in a questionnaire survey, were investigated separately. The questionnaire, which included closed questions derived from a checklist of determinants, was administered to samples of health professionals in each country. Determinants were classified according to whether it was likely that they would inform the design of an implementation intervention (defined as plausibly important determinants). Results: A total of 601 determinants judged to be plausibly important were identified. An additional 609 determinants were judged to be unlikely to inform an implementation intervention, and were classified as not plausibly important. Brainstorming identified 194 of the plausibly important determinants, health professional interviews 152, patient interviews 63, and open questions 48. Structured group discussion identified 144 plausibly important determinants in addition to those already identified by brainstorming. Conclusions: Systematic methods can lead to the identification of large numbers of determinants. Tailoring will usually include a process to decide, from all the determinants that are identified, those to be addressed by implementation interventions. There is no best buy of methods to identify determinants, and a combination should be used, depending on the topic and setting. Brainstorming is a simple, low cost method that could be relevant to many tailored implementation projects.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 22 条
[11]   Barriers and facilitators for successful after hours care model implementation: Reducing ED utilisation [J].
Fry, Margaret M. .
AUSTRALASIAN EMERGENCY NURSING JOURNAL, 2009, 12 (04) :137-144
[12]   Evaluation of a tailored implementation strategy to improve the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care: a study protocol of a cluster randomized trial [J].
Godycki-Cwirko, Maciek ;
Zakowska, Izabela ;
Kosiek, Katarzyna ;
Wensing, Michel ;
Krawczyk, Jaroslaw ;
Kowalczyk, Anna .
TRIALS, 2014, 15
[13]   What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice [J].
Grol, R ;
Wensing, M .
MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2004, 180 (06) :S57-S60
[14]   Planning and studying improvement in patient care: The use of theoretical perspectives [J].
Grol, Richard P. T. M. ;
Bosch, Marije C. ;
Hulscher, Marlies E. J. L. ;
Eccles, Martin P. ;
Wensing, Michel .
MILBANK QUARTERLY, 2007, 85 (01) :93-138
[15]   Effectiveness of a tailored intervention to improve cardiovascular risk management in primary care: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial [J].
Huntink, Elke ;
Heijmans, Naomi ;
Wensing, Michel ;
van Lieshout, Jan .
TRIALS, 2013, 14
[16]   Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD): a protocol for process evaluation in cluster randomized controlled trials in five European countries [J].
Jaeger, Cornelia ;
Freund, Tobias ;
Steinhaeuser, Jost ;
Aakhus, Eivind ;
Flottorp, Signe ;
Godycki-Cwirko, Maciek ;
van Lieshout, Jan ;
Krause, Jane ;
Szecsenyi, Joachim ;
Wensing, Michel .
TRIALS, 2014, 15
[17]   A tailored implementation intervention to implement recommendations addressing polypharmacy in multimorbid patients: study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial [J].
Jaeger, Cornelia ;
Freund, Tobias ;
Steinhaeuser, Jost ;
Joos, Stefanie ;
Wensing, Michel ;
Szecsenyi, Joachim .
TRIALS, 2013, 14
[18]   Evaluation of a tailored intervention to improve management of overweight and obesity in primary care: study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial [J].
Krause, Jane ;
Agarwal, Shona ;
Bodicoat, Danielle H. ;
Ring, Arne ;
Shepherd, David ;
Rogers, Stephen ;
Wensing, Michel ;
Baker, Richard .
TRIALS, 2014, 15
[19]   Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach [J].
Michie, S ;
Johnston, M ;
Abraham, C ;
Lawton, R ;
Parker, D ;
Walker, A .
QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2005, 14 (01) :26-33
[20]  
OECD, 2011, HLTH GLANC