scholarly journals Variation in treatment of hip fractures and guideline adherence amongst surgeons with different training backgrounds in the Netherlands.

Injury ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franka S. Würdemann ◽  
Stijn C Voeten ◽  
Pieta Krijnen ◽  
Inger B Schipper
2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 285-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. M. C. Kemps ◽  
M. M. van Engen-Verheul ◽  
R. A. Kraaijenhagen ◽  
R. Goud ◽  
I. M. Hellemans ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 279-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. T. J. Boereboom ◽  
J. A. Raymakers ◽  
R. R. M. de Groot ◽  
S. A. Duursma

10.2196/16989 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. e16989
Author(s):  
Merle A J Geerds ◽  
Wieke S Nijmeijer ◽  
J H Hegeman ◽  
Miriam M R Vollenbroek-Hutten

Background As a result of an aging population, there has been an increasing incidence of hip fractures worldwide. In the Netherlands, in order to improve the quality of care for elderly patients with hip fractures, the multidisciplinary Centre for Geriatric Traumatology was established in 2008 at the Department of Trauma Surgery at Ziekenhuisgroep Twente hospital (located in Almelo and Hengelo in the Netherlands). Objective Though the Dutch Hip Fracture audit is used to monitor the quality of care for patients with fractures of the hip, only 30.7% of patients complete registration in the 3-month follow-up period. Mobile apps offer an opportunity for improvement in this area. The aim of this study was to investigate the usability and acceptance of a mobile app for gathering indicators of quality of care in a 3-month follow-up period after postoperative treatment of hip fracture. Methods From July 2017 to December 2017, patients who underwent surgical treatment for hip fracture were recruited. Patients and caregivers, who were collectively considered the participant cohort, were asked to download the app and answer a questionnaire. Participants were divided into two groups—those who downloaded the app and those who did not download the app. A telephone interview that was based upon the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology was conducted with a subset of participants from each group (1:1 ratio). This study was designated as not being subject to the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act according to the appropriate medical research ethics committees. Results Of the patients and caregivers who participated, 26.4% (29/110) downloaded the app, whereas 73.6% (81/110) did not. Telephone interviews with the subset of participants (n=24 per group) revealed that 54.0% (13/24) of the group of participants who did not download the app had forgotten the study. Among the group who downloaded the app, 95.8% (23/24) had the intention of completing the questionnaire, but only 4.2% (1/24) did so. The reasons for not completing the questionnaire included technical problems, cognitive disorders, or patient dependency on caregivers. Most participants in the group who downloaded the app self-reported a high level of expertise in using a smartphone (22/24, 91.7%), and sufficient facilitating conditions for using a smartphone were self-reported in both groups (downloaded the app: 23/24, 95.8%; did not download the app: 21/24, 87.5%), suggesting that these factors were not barriers to completion. Conclusions Despite self-reported intention to use the app, smartphone expertise, and sufficient facilitating conditions for smartphone use, implementation of the mobile app was infeasible for daily practice. This was due to a combination of technical problems, factors related to the implementation process, and the population of interest having cognitive disorders or a dependency on caregivers for mobile technology.


2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 1161-1170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ymkje Anna de Vries ◽  
Peter de Jonge ◽  
Luuk Kalverdijk ◽  
Jens H. J. Bos ◽  
Catharina C. M. Schuiling-Veninga ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Lotte Heutinck ◽  
Maaike van Gameren ◽  
Jan J.G.M. Verschuuren ◽  
Alexander C.H. Geurts ◽  
Merel Jansen ◽  
...  

Background: In order to successfully implement the international clinical care guidelines for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) in the Netherlands, it is essential to know what barriers are experienced by healthcare practitioners regarding guideline adherence and organization of care. In the Netherlands, academic medical centers provide follow up visits and work together with peripheral hospitals, rehabilitation centers, centers for home ventilation and primary care centers for treatment. Objective: To investigate perceived barriers to international clinical DMD guideline adherence and identify potential areas of improvement for implementation in the Dutch ‘shared care’ organization. Methods: Semi-structured in-depth interviews with healthcare practitioners of academic medical hospitals and questionnaires for healthcare practitioners of rehabilitation centers, based on the framework of Cabana. Results: The analyses identified 4 barriers for non-adherence to the DMD guideline: (i) lack of familiarity/awareness, (ii) lack of agreement with specific guideline, (iii) lack of outcome expectancy, (iv) external barriers. Conclusions: A heterogeneous set of barriers is present. Therefore, a multifaceted intervention strategy is proposed to overcome these barriers, including a clear division of roles, allowing for local (Dutch) adaptations per specialism by local consensus groups, and the facilitation of easy communication with experts/opinion leaders as well as between care professionals.


2014 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. S39-S40
Author(s):  
K. Holvik ◽  
N.M. van Schoor ◽  
M.S. Bakken ◽  
O.M. Steihaug

1993 ◽  
Vol XXXVII (3) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
F. T. J. BOEREBOOM ◽  
J. A. RAYMAKERS ◽  
S. A. DUURSMA

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document