Attitude and experience of neurologists towards percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: an Egyptian study

Background Dysphagia is a common symptom among various neurological diseases. Guidelines recommend gastrostomy insertion for prolonged dysphagia with lower rate of intervention failure encountered with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) as compared to nasogastric tube insertion. Methods Neurology consultants only were included and completed a self-administered questionnaire concerning their practice backgrounds and previous experience with PEG feeding during their practice. Results Ninety-eight percent stated that they would recommend PEG for patients with prolonged need of nasogastric feeding. However, only 88% actually referred patients to perform PEG, with the cerebrovascular disorders being the most common cases to be referred. The main barriers the surveyed neurologists faced were family resistance and financial reasons (53.5%). Interestingly, younger neurologists practicing for less than 15 years referred patient to perform PEG significantly more frequent than older ones (p = 0.01). About 18% of our sample confirmed the lack of sufficient knowledge about the benefits of PEG feeding, and only 22% previously attended scientific sessions about the benefits and indications of PEG. Conclusion Based on our study, we recommend that PEG should be more encouraged in indicated neurological cases. Scientific sessions targeting neurologists and public awareness about the benefits of PEG and its relatively infrequent complications are highly demanded.

Considerations for Improved Mobile Health Evaluation: Retrospective Qualitative Investigation

Background Mobile phone use and, consequently, mobile health (mHealth) interventions have seen an exponential increase in the last decade. There is an excess of 318,000 health-related apps available free of cost for consumers to download. However, many of these interventions are not evaluated and are lacking appropriate regulations. Randomized controlled trials are often considered the gold standard study design in determining the effectiveness of interventions, but recent literature has identified limitations in the methodology when used to evaluate mHealth. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the system developers’ experiences of evaluating mHealth interventions in the context of a developing country. Methods We employed a qualitative exploratory approach, conducting semistructured interviews with multidisciplinary members of an mHealth project consortium. A conventional content analysis approach was used to allow codes and themes to be identified directly from the data. Results The findings from this study identified the system developers’ perceptions of mHealth evaluation, providing an insight into the requirements of an effective mHealth evaluation. This study identified social and technical factors which should be taken into account when evaluating an mHealth intervention. Conclusions Contextual issues represented one of the most recurrent challenges of mHealth evaluation in the context of a developing country, highlighting the importance of a mixed method evaluation. There is a myriad of social, technical, and regulatory variables, which may impact the effectiveness of an mHealth intervention. Failure to account for these variables in an evaluation may limit the ability of the intervention to achieve long-term implementation and scale.

Can implementation failure or intervention failure explain the result of the 3D multimorbidity trial in general practice: mixed-methods process evaluation

ObjectivesDuring a cluster randomised trial, (the 3D study) of an intervention enacting recommended care for people with multimorbidity, including continuity of care and comprehensive biennial reviews, we examined implementation fidelity to interpret the trial outcome and inform future implementation decisions.DesignMixed-methods process evaluation using cross-trial data and a sample of practices, clinicians, administrators and patients. Interviews, focus groups and review observations were analysed thematically and integrated with quantitative data about implementation. Analysis was blind to trial outcomes and examined context, intervention adoption, reach and maintenance, and delivery of reviews to patients.SettingThirty-three UK general practices in three areas.ParticipantsThe trial included 1546 people with multimorbidity. 11 general practitioners, 14 nurses, 7 administrators and 38 patients from 9 of 16 intervention practices were sampled for an interview.ResultsStaff loss, practice size and different administrative strategies influenced implementation fidelity. Practices with whole administrative team involvement and good alignment between the intervention and usual care generally implemented better. Fewer reviews than intended were delivered (49% of patients receiving both intended reviews, 30% partially reviewed). In completed reviews >90% of intended components were delivered, but review observations and interviews with patients and clinicians found variation in style of component delivery, from ‘tick-box’ to patient-centred approaches. Implementation barriers included inadequate skills training to implement patient-centred care planning, but patients reported increased patient-centredness due to comprehensive reviews, extra time and being asked about their health concerns.ConclusionsImplementation failure contributed to lack of impact of the 3D intervention on the trial primary outcome (quality of life), but so did intervention failure since modifiable elements of intervention design were partially responsible. When a decisive distinction between implementation failure and intervention failure cannot be made, identifying potentially modifiable reasons for suboptimal implementation is important to enhance potential for impact and effectiveness of a redesigned intervention.Trial registration numberISRCTN06180958

Considerations for Improved Mobile Health Evaluation: Retrospective Qualitative Investigation (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Mobile phone use and, consequently, mobile health (mHealth) interventions have seen an exponential increase in the last decade. There is an excess of 318,000 health-related apps available free of cost for consumers to download. However, many of these interventions are not evaluated and are lacking appropriate regulations. Randomized controlled trials are often considered the gold standard study design in determining the effectiveness of interventions, but recent literature has identified limitations in the methodology when used to evaluate mHealth. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to investigate the system developers’ experiences of evaluating mHealth interventions in the context of a developing country. METHODS We employed a qualitative exploratory approach, conducting semistructured interviews with multidisciplinary members of an mHealth project consortium. A conventional content analysis approach was used to allow codes and themes to be identified directly from the data. RESULTS The findings from this study identified the system developers’ perceptions of mHealth evaluation, providing an insight into the requirements of an effective mHealth evaluation. This study identified social and technical factors which should be taken into account when evaluating an mHealth intervention. CONCLUSIONS Contextual issues represented one of the most recurrent challenges of mHealth evaluation in the context of a developing country, highlighting the importance of a mixed method evaluation. There is a myriad of social, technical, and regulatory variables, which may impact the effectiveness of an mHealth intervention. Failure to account for these variables in an evaluation may limit the ability of the intervention to achieve long-term implementation and scale.

Health and appearance reasons for weight loss as predictors of long-term weight change

This study investigated whether women’s initial reasons (health, appearance to others, or appearance to self) for wanting to lose weight influenced their weight change over a 30-month web-based intervention. Multilevel modeling with 1416 observations revealed that only appearance in relation to one’s self was a significant (negative) predictor. Women highly motivated to lose weight to improve their appearance in relation to themselves gained weight at 30 months, whereas those not motivated for this reason achieved clinically significant weight loss. Results suggest examining participants’ initial reasons for weight loss as an important component of intervention failure or success.