scholarly journals Strategies To Implement SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Testing Into Primary Care Settings: A Qualitative Secondary Analysis Guided By The Behaviour Change Wheel

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Kierkegaard ◽  
Timothy Hicks ◽  
A. Joy Allen ◽  
Yaling Yang ◽  
Gail Hayward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Behaviour Change Wheel

Abstract Background: There is little empirical evidence to inform implementation strategies for introducing SARS-CoV-2 point of care (POC) testing into primary care settings. The purpose of this study is to develop a theory-driven understanding of the behavioural determinants underpinning the implementation of SARS-CoV-2 POC testing in primary care. This will allow identification of potential intervention strategies that could encourage successful implementation of testing into routine practice and facilitate face-to-face consultations.Methods: We used a secondary qualitative analysis approach to re-analyse data from a qualitative study that involved interviewing 22 primary care physicians from 21 primary care practices across three regions in England. We followed the three-step method based on the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify barriers/enablers to the implementation of SARS-CoV-2 POC testing and identified behaviour change techniques to inform intervention strategies that targeted the barriers/enablers.Results: We identified 10 barriers and enablers to POC implementation under eight Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF): (1) knowledge; (2) behavioural regulation; (3) reinforcement; (4) skills; (5) environmental context and resources; (6) social influence; (7) professional role and identity; and (8) belief about consequences. Linkages with the Behaviour Change Techniques (BCT) taxonomy enabled the identification of intervention strategies to address the social and contextual factors influencing primary care physician’s willingness and capacity to adopt POC testing.Conclusions: A theory-informed approach identified barriers to the adoption of POC tests in primary care as well as guiding implementation strategies to address these challenges.

scholarly journals Strategies to implement SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care testing into primary care settings: A qualitative secondary analysis guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Kierkegaard ◽  
Timothy Hicks ◽  
A. Joy Allen ◽  
Yaling Yang ◽  
Gail Hayward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Behaviour Change Wheel

Abstract Background There is little empirical evidence to inform implementation strategies for introducing SARS-CoV-2 point of care (POC) testing into primary care settings. The purpose of this study is to develop a theory-driven understanding of the behavioural determinants underpinning the implementation of SARS-CoV-2 POC testing in primary care. This will allow identification of potential intervention strategies that could encourage successful implementation of testing into routine practice and facilitate face-to-face consultations. Methods We used a secondary qualitative analysis approach to re-analyse data from a qualitative study that involved interviewing 22 primary care physicians from 21 primary care practices across three regions in England. We followed the three-step method based on the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify barriers/enablers to the implementation of SARS-CoV-2 POC testing and identified behaviour change techniques to inform intervention strategies that targeted the barriers/enablers. Results We identified 10 barriers and enablers to POC implementation under eight Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF): (1) knowledge; (2) behavioural regulation; (3) reinforcement; (4) skills; (5) environmental context and resources; (6) social influence; (7) professional role and identity; and (8) belief about consequences. Linkages with the Behaviour Change Techniques (BCT) taxonomy enabled the identification of intervention strategies to address the social and contextual factors influencing primary care physician’s willingness and capacity to adopt POC testing. Conclusions A theory-informed approach identified barriers to the adoption of POC tests in primary care as well as guiding implementation strategies to address these challenges.

scholarly journals Evaluating the implementation of a primary care intervention to reduce prescriptions of benzodiazepines (BENZORED IV)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Socias ◽  
Alfonso Leiva ◽  
Haizea Pombo-Ramos ◽  
Ferran Bejarano ◽  
Ermengol Sempere-Verdú ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Traffic Accidents ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Implementation Climate ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
The Individual

Abstract Background: General practitioners (GPs) in developed countries widely prescribe benzodiazepines (BZDs) for their anxiolytic, hypnotic, and muscle-relaxant effects. Treatment duration, however, is rarely limited and this results in a significant number of chronic users. Long-term BZD use is associated with cognitive impairment, falls with hip fractures, traffic accidents, and increased mortality. The BENZORED IV trial was a hybrid type 1 trial conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of an intervention to reduce BZD prescription in primary care. The purpose of this qualitative study was to analyze facilitator and barriers to implement the intervention to primary care settings.Methods: Focus group meetings with GPs from the intervention arm of the BENZORED IV trial were held at primary healthcare centers in the three districts. For sampling purposes, the GPs were classified as high or low implementers according to the success of the intervention measured at 12 months. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to conduct the meetings and to code, rate and analyze the dataResults: Three of the 41 CFIR constructs strongly distinguished between high and low implementers: The complexity in the intervention, the individual Stage of Change and the key stakeholder’s engagement. Seven constructs weakly discriminated between the two groups: the adaptability in the intervention, the external policy and incentives, the implementation climate, the relative priority, the self-efficacy and formally appointed implementation leader engaging. Fourteen constructs did not discriminate between the two groups, six had insufficient data for evaluation, and eleven had no data for evaluation.Conclusion: We identified constructs that could explain the variation in the implementation of the intervention, this information is relevant to design successful implementation strategies to implement the intervention.

scholarly journals Strategies to implement SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care testing into primary care settings: a qualitative secondary analysis guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Kierkegaard ◽  
Timothy Hicks ◽  
A. Joy Allen ◽  
Yaling Yang ◽  
Gail Hayward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Behaviour Change Wheel ◽  
Qualitative Interview Study ◽  
Care Practices ◽  
Willingness To Use ◽  
Primary Care Practices

Abstract Background The purpose of this study is to develop a theory-driven understanding of the barriers and facilitators underpinning physicians’ attitudes and capabilities to implementing SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care (POC) testing into primary care practices. Methods We used a secondary qualitative analysis approach to re-analyse data from a qualitative, interview study of 22 primary care physicians from 21 primary care practices across three regions in England. We followed the three-step method based on the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify the barriers to implementing SARS-CoV-2 POC testing and identified strategies to address these challenges. Results Several factors underpinned primary care physicians’ attitudes and capabilities to implement SARS-CoV-2 POC testing into practice. First, limited knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 POC testing landscape and a demanding workload affected physicians’ willingness to use the tests. Second, there was scepticism about the insufficient evidence pertaining to the clinical efficacy and utility of POC tests, which affected physicians’ confidence in the accuracy of tests. Third, physicians would adopt POC tests if they were prescribed and recommended by authorities. Fourth, physicians required professional education and training to increase their confidence in using POC tests but also suggested that healthcare assistants should administer the tests. Fifth, physicians expressed concerns about their limited workload capacity and that extra resources are needed to accommodate any anticipated changes. Sixth, information sharing across practices shaped perceptions of POC tests and the quality of information influenced physician perceptions. Seventh, financial incentives could motivate physicians and were also needed to cover the associated costs of testing. Eighth, physicians were worried that society will view primary care as an alternative to community testing centres, which would change perceptions around their professional identity. Ninth, physicians’ perception of assurance/risk influenced their willingness to use POC testing if it could help identify infectious individuals, but they were also concerned about the risk of occupational exposure and potentially losing staff members who would need to self-isolate. Conclusions Improving primary care physicians’ knowledgebase of SARS-CoV-2 POC tests, introducing policies to embed testing into practice, and providing resources to meet the anticipated demands of testing are critical to implementing testing into practice.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Use of Point-of-Care C-Reactive Protein Testing to Reduce Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care

Antibiotics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Holmes ◽  
Sharman Harris ◽  
Alison Hughes ◽  
Noel Craine ◽  
Dyfrig Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Respiratory Tract ◽  
Clinical Guidelines ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
C Reactive Protein ◽  
Reactive Protein

More appropriate and measured use of antibiotics may be achieved using point-of-care (POC) C-reactive protein (CRP) testing, but there is limited evidence of cost-effectiveness in routine practice. A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of testing, compared with standard care, in adults presenting in primary care with symptoms of acute respiratory tract infection (ARTI). Analyses considered (1) pragmatic use of testing, reflective of routine clinical practice, and (2) testing according to clinical guidelines. Threshold and scenario analysis were performed to identify cost-effective scenarios. In patients with symptoms of ARTI and based on routine practice, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of CRP testing were £19,705 per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gained and £16.07 per antibiotic prescription avoided. Following clinical guideline, CRP testing in patients with lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) cost £4390 per QALY gained and £9.31 per antibiotic prescription avoided. At a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, the probabilities of POC CRP testing being cost-effective were 0.49 (ARTI) and 0.84 (LRTI). POC CRP testing as implemented in routine practice is appreciably less cost-effective than when adhering to clinical guidelines. The implications for antibiotic resistance and Clostridium difficile infection warrant further investigation.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of interventions to improve rates of intravenous thrombolysis using behaviour change wheel functions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Md Golam Hasnain ◽  
John R. Attia ◽  
Shahinoor Akter ◽  
Tabassum Rahman ◽  
Alix Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Therapeutic Window ◽  
Behaviour Change Wheel ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Despite being one of the few evidence-based treatments for acute ischemic stroke, intravenous thrombolysis has low implementation rates—mainly due to a narrow therapeutic window and the health system changes required to deliver it within the recommended time. This systematic review and meta-analyses explores the differential effectiveness of intervention strategies aimed at improving the rates of intravenous thrombolysis based on the number and type of behaviour change wheel functions employed. Method The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and SCOPUS. Multiple authors independently completed study selection and extraction of data. The review included studies that investigated the effects of intervention strategies aimed at improving the rates of intravenous thrombolysis and/or onset-to-needle, onset-to-door and door-to-needle time for thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Interventions were coded according to the behaviour change wheel nomenclature. Study quality was assessed using the QualSyst scoring system for quantitative research methodologies. Random effects meta-analyses were used to examine effectiveness of interventions based on the behaviour change wheel model in improving rates of thrombolysis, while meta-regression was used to examine the association between the number of behaviour change wheel intervention strategies and intervention effectiveness. Results Results from 77 studies were included. Five behaviour change wheel interventions, ‘Education’, ‘Persuasion’, ‘Training’, ‘Environmental restructuring’ and ‘Enablement’, were found to be employed among the included studies. Effects were similar across all intervention approaches regardless of type or number of behaviour change wheel-based strategies employed. High heterogeneity (I2 > 75%) was observed for all the pooled analyses. Publication bias was also identified. Conclusion There was no evidence for preferring one type of behaviour change intervention strategy, nor for including multiple strategies in improving thrombolysis rates. However, the study results should be interpreted with caution, as they display high heterogeneity and publication bias.

scholarly journals Formative Evaluation Prior to Implementation of a Brief Treatment for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Primary Care

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Valentine ◽  
Cara Fuchs ◽  
Natalya Sarkisova ◽  
Elyse A. Olesinski ◽  
A. Rani Elwy
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ◽  
Posttraumatic Stress ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
Stress Disorder ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Evidence Based Treatments

Abstract Background Successful implementation of evidence-based treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in primary care may address treatment access and quality gaps by providing care in novel and less stigmatized settings. Yet, PTSD treatments are largely unavailable safety net primary care settings. We aimed to collect data on four potential influences on implementation, including the degree of less-than-best practices, determinants of the current practice, potential barriers and facilitators of implementation, and the feasibility of a proposed strategy for implementing a brief treatment for PTSD. Methods Our mixed-methods developmental formative evaluation (Stetler et al., 2006) was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), including a) surveys assessing implementation climate and attitudes towards evidence-based treatments and behavioral health integration and b) semi-structured interviews to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation and need for intervention and system augmentation. Participants were hospital employee stakeholders (N = 22), including primary care physicians, integrated behavioral health clinicians, community wellness advocates, and clinic leadership. We examined frequency and descriptive data from surveys and conducted directed content analysis of interviews. We used a concurrent mixed-methods approach, integrating survey and interview data collected simultaneously using a joint display approach to inform implementation efforts. We utilized a primary care community advisory board (CAB) comprised of employee stakeholders to refine interview guides, and apply findings to the specification of a revised implementation plan. Results Stakeholders described strong attitudinal support, yet therapist time and capacity restraints are major PTSD treatment implementation barriers. Patient engagement barriers such as stigma, mistrust, and care preferences were also noted. Recommendations based on findings included tailoring the intervention to meet existing workflows, system alignment efforts focused on improving detection, referral, and care coordination processes, protecting clinician time for training and consultation, and embedding a researcher in the practice. Conclusions Our evaluation identified key factors to be considered when preparing for implementation of PTSD treatments in safety net integrated primary care settings. Our project also demonstrated that successful implementation of EBTs for PTSD in safety net hospitals necessitates strong stakeholder engagement to identify and mitigate barriers to implementation.

scholarly journals Primary Care implementation of Germ Defence, a digital behaviour change intervention to improve household infection control during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Horwood ◽  
Melanie Chalder ◽  
Ben Ainsworth ◽  
James Denison-Day ◽  
Frank de Vocht ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Implementation Period ◽  
Full Protocol ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Objectives To examine the effectiveness of randomising dissemination of the Germ Defence behaviour change website via GP practices across England UK. Trial design A two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial implementing Germ Defence via GP practices compared with usual care. Participants Setting: All Primary care GP practices in England. Participants: All patients aged 16 years and over who were granted access by participating GP practices. Intervention and comparator Intervention: We will ask staff at GP practices randomised to the intervention arm to share the weblink to Germ Defence with all adult patients registered at their practice during the 4-month trial implementation period and care will otherwise follow current standard management. Germ Defence is an interactive website (http://GermDefence.org/) employing behaviour change techniques and practical advice on how to reduce the spread of infection in the home. The coronavirus version of Germ Defence helps people understand what measures to take and when to take them to avoid infection. This includes hand washing, avoiding sharing rooms and surfaces, dealing with deliveries and ventilating rooms. Using behaviour change techniques, it helps users think through and adopt better home hygiene habits and find ways to solve any barriers, providing personalised goal setting and tailored advice that fits users’ personal circumstances and problem solving to overcome barriers. Comparator: Patients at GP practices randomised to the usual care arm will receive current standard management for the 4-month trial period after which we will ask staff to share the link to Germ Defence with all adult patients registered at their practice. Main outcomes The primary outcome is the effects of implementing Germ Defence on prevalence of all respiratory tract infection diagnoses during the 4-month trial implementation period. The secondary outcomes are: 1) incidence of COVID-19 diagnoses 2) incidence of COVID-19 symptom presentation 3) incidence of gastrointestinal infections 4) number of primary care consultations 5) antibiotic usage 6) hospital admissions 7) uptake of GP practices disseminating Germ Defence to their patients 8) usage of the Germ Defence website by individuals who were granted access by their GP practice Randomisation GP practices will be randomised on a 1:1 basis by the independent Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration (BRTC). Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) in England will be divided into blocks according to region, and equal numbers in each block will be randomly allocated to intervention or usual care. The randomisation schedule will be generated in Stata statistical software by a statistician not otherwise involved in the enrolment of general practices into the study. Blinding (masking) The principal investigators, the statistician and study collaborators will remain blinded from the identity of randomised practices until the end of the study. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) To detect planned effect size (based on PRIMIT trial, Little et al, 2015): 11.1 million respondents from 6822 active GP practices. Assuming 25% of these GP practices will engage, we will contact all GP practices in England spread across 135 Clinical Commissioning Groups. Trial status Protocol version 2.0, dated 13 January 2021. Implementation is ongoing. The implementation period started on 10 November 2020 and will end on 10 March 2021. Trial registration This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry (isrctn.com/ISRCTN14602359) on 12 August 2020. Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

scholarly journals What Are the Effective Behaviour Change Techniques Used to Improve General Health Check Attendance: A Systematic Review Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wing Yan Lau ◽  
Jinxiao Lian ◽  
Maurice Yap
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
General Health ◽  
Search Strategy ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Health Check ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Behaviour Change Wheel

Abstract BackgroundThe general health check serves as an important preventive service to manage chronic illness. While previous studies have identified interventions used to improve utilization, few have provided evidence on the techniques used within an intervention. This has limited the scope of evaluating the intervention’s effectiveness. This systematic review aims to use the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify the intervention options and identify the specific behaviour change techniques implemented. The result is expected to provide comprehensive evidence-based information to inform future intervention development. MethodsA search strategy has been developed using the relevant keywords. Literature searches on four electronic databases have proceeded on 18 August 2021. No data analysis has been carried out yet. The search strategy will be updated towards the end to ensure all relevant literature is included in this review. The retrieved studies will be screened for eligibility following the PRISMA guideline. The quality of the included articles will be appraised using an appropriate quality assessment tool. For data analysis, intervention functions will be identified using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). A content analysis will be followed, by using the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy (BCTTv1) to identify the techniques implemented in each intervention. The result will be presented in a narrative synthesis, summarizing the key techniques used, their frequency of identification and possible patterns of techniques implemented across different studies. Where deemed appropriate, a meta-analysis will be performed.DiscussionThis systematic review may provide evidence for explaining intervention effectiveness in more detail by providing a detailed comparison of intervention components. The results are expected to aid future intervention design to improve the general health check attendance and promote universal health coverage.Systematic review registrationThis protocol is registered on PROSPERO (ref: CRD42021221041).

scholarly journals Feasibility of Audio-Recording Consultations with Pregnant Australian Indigenous Women to Assess Use of Smoking Cessation Behaviour Change Techniques

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Yael Bar-Zeev ◽  
Eliza Skeleton ◽  
Michelle Bovill ◽  
Maree Gruppetta ◽  
Billie Bonevski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Health Providers ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Audio Recording ◽  
Smoking Cessation Counselling ◽  
Audio Recordings

Introduction. Behavioural counselling is an effective method to improve smoking cessation during pregnancy. Audio recordings of consultations have been used previously to assess fidelity in specialized smoking cessation services, but not in primary care. Aims. The study is aimed at assessing the feasibility of audio-recording smoking cessation counselling as part of an intervention in primary care settings and exploring the number and type of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) delivered. Methods. This study was a nested feasibility study within a larger trial. Health providers (HPs) and pregnant women were asked to agree or decline audio recording their smoking-related consultations. Data collected included percentage providing consent, number of recordings performed, HP type, and date (pre/post intervention). Interviews were conducted to assess the trial procedures’ acceptability. Results. Two services provided seven recordings, all pre-intervention. Of the 22 recruited women, 14 consented to being audio recorded (64%) and five provided recordings; of the 23 recruited HPs, 16 agreed (69%), and two provided recordings. Qualitative data suggest that HPs found audio recording difficult to remember. HPs spent on average two minutes discussing smoking and used few BCTs. Conclusions. Audio recordings of smoking-related counselling were not feasible as planned. Future research will need to explore acceptable methods to assess BCT use in primary care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document