1
|
Wu S, Wang L, Li C, Liu W. Effects of social norm feedback on adherence to clinical practice guidelines among healthcare workers and its characteristics in behavior change techniques: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2025; 167:105073. [PMID: 40220512 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2024] [Revised: 12/26/2024] [Accepted: 03/24/2025] [Indexed: 04/14/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Poor adherence to clinical practice guidelines among healthcare workers could have negative impacts on the effectiveness of care, patient health outcomes, and healthcare costs. Social norm feedback can be an essential means of achieving the intended intervention goals by providing information to the intervention target regarding the values, attitudes, or behaviors of the reference group or individual. However, there is a lack of consensus on the effectiveness of social norm feedback in improving adherence to clinical practice guidelines among healthcare workers. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to assess the effects of social norm feedback on adherence to clinical practice guidelines among healthcare workers and its characteristics in behavior change techniques. METHODS Searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via CENTRAL), EMBASE (via OVID), MEDLINE (via OVID), and Scopus were preformed to identify peer-reviewed studies published until February 29, 2024. Randomized controlled trials reporting social norm feedback interventions (social comparison, information about others' approval, credible source, social reward, and social incentive) to support compliance with clinical practice guidelines were included. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and the certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE method. Pooled data were analyzed in Stata 17.0 using a random effects model meta-analysis. RESULTS A total of 31 articles (30 studies) were identified. Fifteen behavior change techniques were tested in the included studies. The three most commonly used behavior change techniques in clinical practice guidelines were social comparison, feedback on the outcome of behavior, and social support. A meta-analysis showed that social norm feedback appeared to be an effective strategy to improve adherence to clinical practice guidelines among healthcare workers, with a rate difference (RD) of 0.04 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.02-0.06). Credible source (RD 0.12, 95 % CI 0.06-0.19) and multiple social norms behavioral change techniques (RD 0.05, 95 % CI 0.04-0.06) seemed effective when combined with other behavioral change techniques, compared to the control condition. The certainty of evidence across the outcomes ranged from very low to high based on the GRADE approach. CONCLUSION Social norm feedback appears to be an effective method for improving adherence to clinical practice guidelines among healthcare workers. This review provides a broad understanding of how social norm feedback can be applied to improve adherence of healthcare workers to clinical practice guidelines, ultimately improving patient health and quality of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42023411582.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shiyin Wu
- Department of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Health Management, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Lingjie Wang
- Department of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Health Management, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Changle Li
- Department of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Health Management, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
| | - Wenbin Liu
- Department of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Health Management, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hickey S, Saywell NL, Adams T, Hill J. Dissemination Strategies for Clinical Practice Guidelines Focused on Imaging for Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review. Musculoskeletal Care 2025; 23:e70086. [PMID: 40155356 PMCID: PMC11953065 DOI: 10.1002/msc.70086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2025] [Revised: 03/05/2025] [Accepted: 03/11/2025] [Indexed: 04/01/2025]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate campaigns developed for the dissemination of clinical practice guidelines for the appropriate use of imaging for low back pain. METHOD A scoping review was conducted to identify resources which report on dissemination strategies for low back pain imaging clinical practice guidelines. A database search was conducted of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Reviews, Scopus, Google, Google Scholar and National Health Service Websites. The full text of relevant resources identified from the title and abstract screen were retrieved and assessed for inclusion eligibility. RESULTS The initial search identified 1087 resources. Following a title, abstract and full-text screen, 26 resources were included for final synthesis. Relevant data were extracted and categorised into the following three key components: (1). Location of the campaign, (2). Campaign details, (3). Dissemination strategies as defined by five methods (educational resources, presentations and interactive interventions, media form, clinical decision support, and other). Educational resources and interactive interventions were the most commonly used strategies, with media resources implemented the least. CONCLUSION Low back pain imaging clinical practice guidelines have been disseminated to clinicians at regional and national levels; however, there are few international campaigns. The comprehensive list of dissemination strategies included in this study has created a foundation to facilitate the design of future campaigns to enhance the scope of trialled strategies to consider the complexities of clinical practice and its ever present need to change.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nicola L. Saywell
- Physiotherapy DepartmentSchool of Clinical Sciences. Auckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
- Rehabilitation Innovation CentreAuckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
| | - Thomas Adams
- Physiotherapy DepartmentSchool of Clinical Sciences. Auckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
- Active Living and Rehabilitation: Aotearoa New ZealandSchool of Clinical SciencesAuckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
| | - Julia Hill
- Physiotherapy DepartmentSchool of Clinical Sciences. Auckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
- Active Living and Rehabilitation: Aotearoa New ZealandSchool of Clinical SciencesAuckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chan HY, Karande GY, Tan CH, Ng YH, Png MA, Ricci V, Young A, Chan LP. Implementing appropriateness criteria for use of imaging technology (Project ACUITY) in magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine: a Singapore experience. Singapore Med J 2025:00077293-990000000-00194. [PMID: 40346782 DOI: 10.4103/singaporemedj.smj-2024-096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2024] [Accepted: 10/08/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2025]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Uncomplicated acute low back pain is usually self-limiting and does not warrant imaging. However, despite current recommendations, many patients continue to receive spinal imaging, increasing healthcare costs. The Ministry of Health, Singapore, convened a multidisciplinary workgroup to develop a consensus guideline on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar spine (Agency for Care Effectiveness [ACE] guideline) for low back pain that was incorporated into electronic radiology order forms. We analysed the MRI orders following implementation of the guideline. METHODS A list of 'appropriate' and 'inappropriate' indications was developed based on existing literature. These indications were inserted into the MRI of the lumbar spine request form within the electronic system. It was mandatory for clinicians to specify on a drop-down list of indications. For 'inappropriate' indications, clinicians are required to fill out a free-text 'pop up' elaborating on their clinical reasoning for the MRI request. RESULTS Baseline pre-intervention data were collected over 3 months. A total of 492 MRI scans were performed with 64 (13.0%) inappropriate orders. Post-intervention, we retrospectively analysed two sets of data over 3 months each in 2021 and 2022. In 2021, there were 86 (9.1%) inappropriate orders out of 940 scans performed. In 2022, there were 38 (7.3%) inappropriate studies out of 521 scans performed. There was a statistically significant overall decrease in inappropriate scans from 13.0% pre-intervention to 7.3% post-intervention ( P = 0.01). Among all the 124 inappropriate studies post-intervention, only one patient eventually required surgery. CONCLUSION Our study demonstrates the positive impact of implementing a local guideline through electronic medical records in reducing inappropriate MRI of the lumbar spine for low back pain. Further studies on the impact of other behavioural nudges are recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiok Yang Chan
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | | | - Cher Heng Tan
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore
| | - Yeong Huei Ng
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Meng Ai Png
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | | | - Adelina Young
- Agency of Care Effectiveness, Ministry of Health, Singapore
| | - Lai Peng Chan
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ivers N, Yogasingam S, Lacroix M, Brown KA, Antony J, Soobiah C, Simeoni M, Willis TA, Crawshaw J, Antonopoulou V, Meyer C, Solbak NM, Murray BJ, Butler EA, Lepage S, Giltenane M, Carter MD, Fontaine G, Sykes M, Halasy M, Bazazo A, Seaton S, Canavan T, Alderson S, Reis C, Linklater S, Lalor A, Fletcher A, Gearon E, Jenkins H, Wallis JA, Grobler L, Beccaria L, Cyril S, Rozbroj T, Han JX, Xu AX, Wu K, Rouleau G, Shah M, Konnyu K, Colquhoun H, Presseau J, O'Connor D, Lorencatto F, Grimshaw JM. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2025; 3:CD000259. [PMID: 40130784 PMCID: PMC11934852 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd000259.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/26/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Audit and feedback (A&F) is a widely used strategy to improve professional practice. This is supported by prior Cochrane reviews and behavioural theories describing how healthcare professionals are prompted to modify their practice when given data showing that their clinical practice is inconsistent with a desirable target. Yet there remains uncertainty regarding the effects of A&F on improving healthcare practice and the characteristics of A&F that lead to a greater impact. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of A&F on the practice of healthcare professionals and to examine factors that may explain variation in the effectiveness of A&F. SEARCH METHODS With the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group information scientist, we updated our search strategy to include studies published from 2010 to June 2020. Search updates were performed on 28 February 2019 and 11 June 2020. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), the Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov (all dates to June 2020), WHO ICTRP (all dates to February Week 3 2019, no information available in 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic). An updated search and duplicate screen was completed on February 14, 2022; studies that met inclusion criteria are included in the 'Studies awaiting classification' section. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised trials, including cluster-trials and cross-over and factorial designs, featuring A&F (defined as measurement of clinical performance over a specified period of time (audit) and provision of the resulting data to clinicians or clinical teams (feedback)) in any trial arm that reported objectively measured health professional practice outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS For this updated review, we re-extracted data for each study arm, including theory-informed variables regarding how the A&F was conducted and behaviour change techniques for each intervention, as well as study-level characteristics including risk of bias. For each study, we extracted outcome data for every healthcare professional practice targeted by A&F. All data were extracted by a minimum of two independent review authors. For studies with dichotomous outcomes that included arms with and without A&F, we calculated risk differences (RDs) (absolute difference between arms in proportion of desired practice completed) and also odds ratios (ORs). We synthesised the median RDs and interquartile ranges (IQRs) across all trials. We then conducted meta-analyses, accounting for multiple outcomes from a given study and weighted by effective sample size, using reported (or imputed, when necessary) intra-cluster correlation coefficients. Next, we explored the role of baseline performance, co-interventions, targeted behaviour, and study design factors on the estimated effects of A&F. Finally, we conducted exploratory meta-regressions to test preselected variables that might be associated with A&F effect size: characteristics of the audit (number of indicators, aggregation of data); delivery of the feedback (multi-modal format, local champion, nature of comparator, repeated delivery); and components supporting action (facilitation, provision of specific plans for improvement, co-development of action plans). MAIN RESULTS We included 292 studies with 678 arms; 133 (46%) had a low risk of bias, 41 (14%) unclear, and 113 (39%) had a high risk of bias. There were 26 (9%) studies conducted in low- or middle-income countries. In most studies (237, 81%), the recipients of A&F were physicians. Professional practices most commonly targeted in the studies were prescribing (138 studies, 47%) and test-ordering (103 studies, 35%). Most studies featured multifaceted interventions: the most common co-interventions were clinician education (377 study arms, 56%) and reminders (100 study arms, 15%). Forty-eight unique behaviour change techniques were identified within the study arms (mean 5.2, standard deviation 2.8, range 1 to 29). Synthesis of 558 dichotomous outcomes measuring professional practices from 177 studies testing A&F versus control revealed a median absolute improvement in desired practice of 2.7%, with an IQR of 0.0 to 8.6. Meta-analyses of these studies, accounting for multiple outcomes from the same study and weighting by effective sample size accounting for clustering, found a mean absolute increase in desired practice of 6.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1 to 8.2; moderate-certainty evidence) and an OR of 1.47 (95% CI 1.31 to 1.64; moderate-certainty evidence). Effects were similar for pre-planned subgroup analyses focused on prescribing and test-ordering outcomes. Lower baseline performance and increased number of co-interventions were both associated with larger intervention effects. Meta-regressions comparing the presence versus absence of specific A&F components to explore heterogeneity, accounting for baseline performance and number of co-interventions, suggested that A&F effects were greater with individual-recipient-level data rather than team-level data, comparing performance to top-peers or a benchmark, involving a local champion with whom the recipient had a relationship, using interactive modalities rather than just didactic or just written format, and with facilitation to support engagement, and action plans to improve performance. The meta-regressions did not find significant effects with the number of indicators in the audit, comparison to average performance of all peers, or co-development of action plans. Contrary to expectations, repeated delivery was associated with lower effect size. Direct comparisons from head-to-head trials support the use of peer-comparisons versus no comparison at all and the use of design elements in feedback that facilitate the identification and action of high-priority clinical items. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS A&F can be effective in improving professional practice, but effects vary in size. A&F is most often delivered along with co-interventions which can contribute additive effects. A&F may be most effective when designed to help recipients prioritise and take action on high-priority clinical issues and with the following characteristics: 1. targets important performance metrics where health professionals have substantial room for improvement (audit); 2. measures the individual recipient's practice, rather than their team or organisation (audit); 3. involves a local champion with an existing relationship with the recipient (feedback); 4. includes multiple, interactive modalities such as verbal and written (feedback); 5. compares performance to top peers or a benchmark (feedback); 6. facilitates engagement with the feedback (action); 7. features an actionable plan with specific advice for improvement (action). These conclusions require further confirmatory research; future research should focus on discerning ways to optimise the effectiveness of A&F interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noah Ivers
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | | | | | - Kevin A Brown
- Public Health Ontario, 661 University Avenue, Suite 1701, Toronto, ON M5G1M1, Canada
| | - Jesmin Antony
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | | | | | - Thomas A Willis
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Vivi Antonopoulou
- Centre for Behaviour Change, Department of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London (UCL), London WC1E 7HB, UK
- NIHR Policy Research Unit in Behavioural Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4AX, UK
| | - Carly Meyer
- Centre for Behaviour Change, Department of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London (UCL), London WC1E 7HB, UK
- NIHR Policy Research Unit in Behavioural Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4AX, UK
| | - Nathan M Solbak
- Physician Learning Program, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Brenna J Murray
- Physician Learning Program, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Emily-Ann Butler
- Physician Learning Program, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Simone Lepage
- School of Nursing & Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Martina Giltenane
- School of Nursing & Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Health Research Insitute, University of Limerick , Limerick , Ireland
| | - Mary D Carter
- Health & Community Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Guillaume Fontaine
- Ingram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Sir Mortimer B. Davis Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
- Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Michael Halasy
- Arizona School of Health Sciences, A.T. Still University, Mesa, Arizona, USA
| | - Abdalla Bazazo
- Northern Ontario School of Medicine (NOSM) University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
- Thunder Bay Regional Health Research Institute, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
- Listowel Wingham Hospitals Alliance, Wingham, ON, Canada
| | | | - Tony Canavan
- Saolta University Health Care Group, University Hospital Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | | | | | | | - Aislinn Lalor
- Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Malvern, Australia
- Rehabilitation, Ageing, and Independent Living (RAIL) Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Occupational Therapy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Ashley Fletcher
- Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute and Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Malvern, Australia
| | - Emma Gearon
- Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute and Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Malvern, Australia
| | - Hazel Jenkins
- Department of Chiropractic , Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jason A Wallis
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Liesl Grobler
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Lisa Beccaria
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Health Research , University of Southern Queensland , Toowoomba, Australia
| | - Sheila Cyril
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Tomas Rozbroj
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jia Xi Han
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | | | - Geneviève Rouleau
- Nursing department, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Saint-Jérôme, Canada
| | - Maryam Shah
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Kristin Konnyu
- Aberdeen Centre for Evaluation, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Heather Colquhoun
- Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Denise O'Connor
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Fabiana Lorencatto
- Centre for Behaviour Change, Department of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London (UCL), London WC1E 7HB, UK
- NIHR Policy Research Unit in Behavioural Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4AX, UK
| | - Jeremy M Grimshaw
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Munneke W, De Kooning M, Nijs J, Morin C, Berquin A, Meeus M, Hartvigsen J, Demoulin C. Enhancing healthcare professionals' biopsychosocial perspective to chronic pain: assessing the impact of implementing an interdisciplinary training program. Pain 2025; 166:644-655. [PMID: 39527699 PMCID: PMC11808697 DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003403] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2024] [Revised: 07/31/2024] [Accepted: 08/01/2024] [Indexed: 11/16/2024]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Advancements in clinical science have shown the necessity for a paradigm shift away from a biomedical toward a biopsychosocial approach. Yet, the translation from clinical science into clinical practice is challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the short-term and mid-term changes in pain knowledge and attitudes and guideline-adherent recommendations of healthcare professionals (HCP) by means of an interdisciplinary training program (ITP) about chronic pain. Belgian HCPs, with a priority for medical doctors, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, nurses, psychologists, and pharmacists in primary care, participated in the ITP, which contained 2 e-learning modules and two 7-hour workshops provided in small interdisciplinary groups in 5 cities. The objective of ITP was to improve HCP's competencies for integrating biopsychosocial chronic pain management with a cognitive behavioral approach into clinical practice. Primary outcomes were changes in knowledge and attitudes about pain and guideline-adherent recommendations for continuation of physical activity, sports, and work; avoiding bed rest; and not supporting opioid usage measured through 2 clinical vignettes. They were measured before, immediately after, and 6 months after the ITP. Changes were analyzed using (generalized) linear mixed models. A total of 405 HCPs participated. The knowledge and attitudes about pain scores improved at post-training (Δ = 9.04, 95% confidence interval 7.72-10.36) and at 6-month follow-up (Δ = 7.16, 95% confidence interval 5.73-8.59). After the training program, HCPs provided significantly more recommendations in accordance with clinical guidelines. Thus, an ITP can improve the biopsychosocial perspective of chronic pain management among HCPs in the short-term and mid-term.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wouter Munneke
- Pain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Physical Activity and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium
| | - Margot De Kooning
- Pain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Jo Nijs
- Pain in Motion Research Group (PAIN), Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM), Brussels, Belgium
- Unit of Physiotherapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Chronic Pain Rehabilitation, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine and Physiotherapy, University Hospital Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Carine Morin
- Société Scientifique de Médecine Générale (SSMG), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Anne Berquin
- Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mira Meeus
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM), Brussels, Belgium
- MOVANT Research Group, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Jan Hartvigsen
- Center for Muscle and Joint Health, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Chiropractic Knowledge Hub, Odense, Denmark
| | - Christophe Demoulin
- Department of Physical Activity and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, CHU Liège, Liège, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Barros Guinle MI, Johnstone T, Ruiz Colón GD, Weng Y, Nettnin EA, Ratliff JK. Health care utilization among Medicare beneficiaries with newly diagnosed back pain. NORTH AMERICAN SPINE SOCIETY JOURNAL 2024; 20:100565. [PMID: 39670143 PMCID: PMC11636345 DOI: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100565] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2024] [Revised: 10/21/2024] [Accepted: 10/22/2024] [Indexed: 12/14/2024]
Abstract
Background Low back pain (LBP) is the most common medical cause of disability among adults 65 or older. No previous study has characterized health care costs and treatment patterns of LBP among Medicare beneficiaries. Methods This retrospective cohort study quantifies health care utilization costs among Medicare beneficiaries with newly diagnosed LBP, compares costs between patients managed operatively and nonoperatively, identifies costs associated with treatment guideline nonadherence, and characterizes opioid prescribing patterns. Patients were queried via ICD codes from a 20% random sample of Medicare claims records. Patients with concomitant or previous "red flag" diagnoses, neurological deficits, or diagnoses that could cause nondegenerative LBP were excluded. Total costs of care in the year of diagnosis were calculated and stratified by operative versus nonoperative management. To assess for guideline adherence, utilization and costs of different services were tabulated. Opioid prescription patterns were characterized by quantity, cost, duration, and medication type. Results About 1,269,896 patients were identified; 23,919 (1.8%) underwent surgery. These accounted for 7% of the cohort's total cost ($514 million total, $21,496 per person). Patients treated nonoperatively accounted for over $7 billion in costs ($5,880 per person; p<.001). Within the nonoperative cohort, 626,896 (50.3%) patients were nonadherent to current guidelines for conservative management of LBP. Guideline nonadherence increased total annual costs by $4,012 per person ($7,873 for nonadherent vs. $3,861 for adherent patients, p<.001). About 460,867 opioid prescriptions were filled for 303,796 unique patients (23.9%) within 30 days of LBP diagnosis. Within the nonsurgical cohort, patients nonadherent to imaging guidelines were more likely to have an opioid prescription within this window than adherent patients (26.5% vs. 21.2%; p<.001). Conclusions Nonoperative management of LBP is associated with significantly lower costs per patient. Early imaging and opioid prescription are significant drivers of excess cost. Adherence to proposed treatment guidelines can save over $2.8 billion in total health care costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Thomas Johnstone
- Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Gabriela D. Ruiz Colón
- Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Yingjie Weng
- Quantitative Sciences Unit, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Ella A. Nettnin
- Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - John K. Ratliff
- Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhao S, Langford AV, Chen Q, Lyu M, Yang Z, French SD, Williams CM, Lin CWC. Effectiveness of strategies for implementing guideline-concordant care in low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. EClinicalMedicine 2024; 78:102916. [PMID: 39606686 PMCID: PMC11600785 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102916] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2024] [Revised: 10/17/2024] [Accepted: 10/18/2024] [Indexed: 11/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Background International low back pain guidelines recommend providing education/advice to patients, discouraging routine imaging use, and encouraging judicious prescribing of analgesics. However, practice variation occurs and the effectiveness of implementation strategies to promote guideline-concordant care is unclear. This review aims to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies to promote guideline-concordant care for low back pain. Methods Five databases (including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL and PEDro were searched from inception until 22nd August 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies to promote guideline-concordant care (providing education/advice, discouraging routine imaging use, and/or reducing analgesic use) among healthcare professionals or organisations were included. Two reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments. The primary outcome was guideline-concordant care in the medium-term (>3 months but <12 months). The taxonomy recommended by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group was used to categorise implementation strategies. Meta-analysis with a random-effects model was conducted where possible. This systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42023452969). Findings Twenty-seven RCTs with 32 reports were included. All strategies targeted healthcare professionals (7796 health professionals overseeing 34,890 patients with low back pain), and none targeted organisations. The most commonly used implementation strategies were educational materials (15/27) and educational meetings (14/27), although most studies (24/27) used more than one strategy ('multifaceted strategies'). In the medium-term, compared to no implementation, implementation strategies probably reduced the use of routine imaging (number of studies [N] = 7, odds ratio [OR] = 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.58, I 2 = 50%, moderate certainty evidence), but made no difference in reducing analgesic use (N = 4, OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.96-1.14, I 2 = 0%, high certainty evidence). Further, implementation strategies may make no difference to improve the rate of providing education/advice (N = 3, OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 0.87-3.87, I 2 = 95%, low certainty evidence), but this finding should be interpreted with caution because the sensitivity analysis showed a weak positive finding indicating unstable results that are likely to change with future research (N = 2, OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.04-1.35, I 2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence). No difference was found when comparing one implementation strategy to another in the medium-term. Interpretation Implementing guideline recommendations delivered mixed effects in promoting guideline-concordant care for low back pain management. Funding There was no funding source for this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siya Zhao
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Aili V. Langford
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney School of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Qiuzhe Chen
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Meng Lyu
- School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Zhiwei Yang
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Simon D. French
- Department of Chiropractic, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Christopher M. Williams
- University Centre for Rural Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Lismore, NSW, Australia
- Research and Knowledge Translation Directorate, Mid North Coast Local Health District, Port Macquarie, NSW, Australia
| | - Chung-Wei Christine Lin
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ricart E, Bastida G, Carpio D, Ceballos D, Ginard D, Marín-Jimenéz I, Menchén L, Muñoz F, González-Lama Y. Clinical Approach to STRIDE-II in Real-Life Settings: Analysis and Practical Recommendations. CROHN'S & COLITIS 360 2024; 6:otae055. [PMID: 39445340 PMCID: PMC11497081 DOI: 10.1093/crocol/otae055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2024] [Indexed: 10/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Background We aimed to (1) analyze the applicability of the updated Selecting Therapeutic Targets in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (STRIDE-II) recommendations in real-world clinical practice, (2) identify barriers to their implementation, and (3) propose practical measures to overcome these obstacles. Methods This qualitative study was based on a survey, a literature review, and expert opinions. Nine inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experts identified 7 areas likely to be controversial or potential implementation barriers in daily clinical practice: endoscopy, histology, ultrasound, quality of life, biomarkers, symptom control, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Based on this, a survey was carried out among educational course participants. The experts discussed the literature review and survey results and proposed several statements and practical actions. Results A total of 55 gastroenterologists answered the survey. The reported difficulty level in reaching STRIDE-II treatment goals in clinical practice was high. Only 22% of participants performed clinical remission assessments using clinical indexes and PROs. Seventy percent of responders did not use fecal calprotectin cutoffs and considered changes from the previous levels instead. Mucosal healing as a long-term therapeutic goal was considered necessary to be individualized in specific patient subgroups (eg, elderly/fragile patients, multiple treatment failures, and last-line therapies). Other barriers, like the lack of access to imaging techniques or insufficient knowledge and skills among healthcare professionals, were detected. The experts suggested adding less stringent treatment goals and measurements, patient stratification, local adaptations, educational activities, and research. Conclusions STRIDE-II recommendations face various implementation barriers needing careful evaluation in order to enhance their adoption in clinical practice, and ultimately improve outcomes in IBD patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elena Ricart
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Clinic Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBEREHD, Barcelona 08036, Spain
| | - Guillermo Bastida
- Gastroenterology Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia 46026, Spain
| | - Daniel Carpio
- Gastroenterology Department, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Pontevedra, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS), Pontevedra 36071, Spain
| | - Daniel Ceballos
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario Doctor Negrin, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria 35010, Spain
| | - Daniel Ginard
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca 07120, Spain
| | - Ignacio Marín-Jimenéz
- Gastroenterology Department, Departamento de Medicina, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón-Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Madrid 28007, Spain
| | - Luis Menchén
- Gastroenterology Department, Departamento de Medicina, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón-Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Madrid 28007, Spain
| | - Fernando Muñoz
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca, Salamanca 37007, Spain
| | - Yago González-Lama
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Unit, Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid 28041, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Sykes M, Rosenberg-Yunger ZRS, Quigley M, Gupta L, Thomas O, Robinson L, Caulfield K, Ivers N, Alderson S. Exploring the content and delivery of feedback facilitation co-interventions: a systematic review. Implement Sci 2024; 19:37. [PMID: 38807219 PMCID: PMC11134935 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-024-01365-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2024] [Indexed: 05/30/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policymakers and researchers recommend supporting the capabilities of feedback recipients to increase the quality of care. There are different ways to support capabilities. We aimed to describe the content and delivery of feedback facilitation interventions delivered alongside audit and feedback within randomised controlled trials. METHODS We included papers describing feedback facilitation identified by the latest Cochrane review of audit and feedback. The piloted extraction proforma was based upon a framework to describe intervention content, with additional prompts relating to the identification of influences, selection of improvement actions and consideration of priorities and implications. We describe the content and delivery graphically, statistically and narratively. RESULTS We reviewed 146 papers describing 104 feedback facilitation interventions. Across included studies, feedback facilitation contained 26 different implementation strategies. There was a median of three implementation strategies per intervention and evidence that the number of strategies per intervention is increasing. Theory was used in 35 trials, although the precise role of theory was poorly described. Ten studies provided a logic model and six of these described their mechanisms of action. Both the exploration of influences and the selection of improvement actions were described in 46 of the feedback facilitation interventions; we describe who undertook this tailoring work. Exploring dose, there was large variation in duration (15-1800 min), frequency (1 to 42 times) and number of recipients per site (1 to 135). There were important gaps in reporting, but some evidence that reporting is improving over time. CONCLUSIONS Heterogeneity in the design of feedback facilitation needs to be considered when assessing the intervention's effectiveness. We describe explicit feedback facilitation choices for future intervention developers based upon choices made to date. We found the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change to be valuable when describing intervention components, with the potential for some minor clarifications in terms and for greater specificity by intervention providers. Reporting demonstrated extensive gaps which hinder both replication and learning. Feedback facilitation providers are recommended to close reporting gaps that hinder replication. Future work should seek to address the 'opportunity' for improvement activity, defined as factors that lie outside the individual that make care or improvement behaviour possible. REVIEW REGISTRATION The study protocol was published at: https://www.protocols.io/private/4DA5DE33B68E11ED9EF70A58A9FEAC02 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Lisa Robinson
- Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Karen Caulfield
- Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Munneke W, Demoulin C, Nijs J, Morin C, Kool E, Berquin A, Meeus M, De Kooning M. Development of an interdisciplinary training program about chronic pain management with a cognitive behavioural approach for healthcare professionals: part of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION 2024; 24:331. [PMID: 38519899 PMCID: PMC10960450 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-024-05308-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Accepted: 03/13/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many applied postgraduate pain training programs are monodisciplinary, whereas interdisciplinary training programs potentially improve interdisciplinary collaboration, which is favourable for managing patients with chronic pain. However, limited research exists on the development and impact of interdisciplinary training programs, particularly in the context of chronic pain. METHODS This study aimed to describe the development and implementation of an interdisciplinary training program regarding the management of patients with chronic pain, which is part of a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study. The targeted groups included medical doctors, nurses, psychologists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dentists and pharmacists. An interdisciplinary expert panel was organised to provide its perception of the importance of formulated competencies for integrating biopsychosocial pain management with a cognitive behavioural approach into clinical practice. They were also asked to provide their perception of the extent to which healthcare professionals already possess the competencies in their clinical practice. Additionally, the expert panel was asked to formulate the barriers and needs relating to training content and the implementation of biopsychosocial chronic pain management with a cognitive behavioural approach in clinical practice, which was complemented with a literature search. This was used to develop and adapt the training program to the barriers and needs of stakeholders. RESULTS The interdisciplinary expert panel considered the competencies as very important. Additionally, they perceived a relatively low level of healthcare professionals' possession of the competencies in their clinical practice. A wide variety of barriers and needs for stakeholders were formulated and organized within the Theoretical Domain Framework linked to the COM-B domains; 'capability', 'opportunity', and 'motivation'. The developed interdisciplinary training program, including two workshops of seven hours each and two e-learning modules, aimed to improve HCP's competencies for integrating biopsychosocial chronic pain management with a cognitive behavioural approach into clinical practice. CONCLUSION We designed an interdisciplinary training program, based on formulated barriers regarding the management of patients with chronic pain that can be used as a foundation for developing and enhancing the quality of future training programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wouter Munneke
- Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM)
- Department of Sport and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium
| | - Christophe Demoulin
- Department of Sport and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liege, Belgium
| | - Jo Nijs
- Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM)
- Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Unit of Physiotherapy, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of rehabilitation medicine and physiotherapy, University Hospital Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Carine Morin
- Société Scientifique de Médecine Générale (SSMG), Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Anne Berquin
- Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mira Meeus
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM)
- MOVANT research group, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Margot De Kooning
- Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
- Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM), .
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Urruticoechea-Arana A, Sanz J, Ginard D, González-Lama Y, Juanola X, Almirall M, Borruel N, Gratacós J, Loza E. Implementation of the recommendations for the psychological management of patients with spondyloarthritis and inflammatory bowel disease. REUMATOLOGIA CLINICA 2023; 19:423-429. [PMID: 37805255 DOI: 10.1016/j.reumae.2023.03.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2023] [Indexed: 10/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess and improve the level of implementation of the recommendations for the psychological management of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) and associated inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS Qualitative study. We performed a narrative literature review to identify the recommendations for the psychological management of SpA and associated IBD and to explore their level of implementation. Based on the findings, we developed a national survey to assess: (1) current level of knowledge and implementation of the recommendations; (2) attitudes towards the recommendations; and (3) barriers and facilitators to their implementation. The results of the review and survey were discussed by a multidisciplinary group of 9 expert rheumatologists and gastroenterologists, who defined implementation strategies to increase the uptake of the recommendations. RESULTS The review included 4 articles, 2 of them included direct recommendations on the identification and management of psychological problems in patients with SpA and IBD. None assessed the level of implementation of the recommendations in routine clinical practice. Our survey showed a great lack of awareness and implementation of the recommendations, even though psychological issues are very relevant for health professionals. Lack of time, resources, and knowledge are considered the main barriers to adherence to the recommendations. We propose several implementation strategies related to educational activities, clinical practice, and others to increase the uptake of reported recommendations. CONCLUSIONS Further research and efforts are required to achieve behaviour changes in clinical practice to improve the identification and management of psychological problems and needs in patients with SpA and IBD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jesús Sanz
- Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
| | - Daniel Ginard
- Servicio de Gastroenterología, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
| | - Yago González-Lama
- Unidad de Enfermedad Inflamatoria Intestinal, Servicio de Gastroenterología y Hepatología, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
| | - Xavier Juanola
- Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital Universitario Bellvitge, IDIBELL, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Miriam Almirall
- Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Natalia Borruel
- Unidad de atención Crohn-Colitis (UACC), Servicio del Aparato Digestivo, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jordi Gratacós
- Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital Universitario Parc Taulí Sabadell, I3PT, Departamento de Medicina UAB, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Estíbaliz Loza
- Instituto de Salud Musculoesquelética (InMusc), Madrid, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Using general practitioners with an extended role in spinal practice for the initial assessment of patients referred to spinal surgeons: preliminary experience and challenges. Prim Health Care Res Dev 2023; 24:e9. [PMID: 36700455 PMCID: PMC9884532 DOI: 10.1017/s1463423622000494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To describe experience using general practitioners (GPs), with an extended role (GPwER) in spinal medicine, to expedite assessment, triage, and management of patients referred from primary care for specialist spinal surgical opinion. BACKGROUND Low back and neck pain are common conditions in primary care. Indiscriminate or inappropriate referral to a spinal surgeon contributes to long waiting times. Previous attempts at triaging patients who really require a surgical opinion have used practice nurses, physiotherapists, clinical algorithms, and interdisciplinary screening clinics. METHODS Within the setting of an independent spinal care centre, we have used GPs specially trained in spinal practice to expedite the assessment and triage of new referrals between 2015 and 2021. We reviewed feedback from a Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire and the postgraduate backgrounds, training, practice with regard to triage of new referrals, and experiences of the GPs who were recruited. FINDINGS Six GPwER had a mean of 26 years of postgraduate experience before appointment (range 10-44 years). The first four GPwER, appointed between 2015 and 2018, underwent an ad hoc in-house, interdisciplinary training programme and saw 2994 new patients between 2016 and 2020. After GPwER, assessment in only 18.9% (range 12.6 to 22.7%) of these patients was a spinal surgical opinion deemed necessary. Waiting times to see the spinal surgeon remained at 6-8 weeks despite a three-fold annual increase (from 340 to 1058) in new referrals. A Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire revealed high levels of satisfaction with the performances of the GPwER across seven dimensions. A dedicated training programme was designed in 2020, and the last two appointees underwent 20 h of clinical teaching prior to practice. Initial experience using GPwER, here termed 'Spinal Clinicians', suggests they are efficient at screening for patients needing spinal surgical referral. Establishing a recognised training programme, assessment, and certification for these practitioners are the next challenges.
Collapse
|
13
|
Feasibility of testing the effectiveness of a theory-informed intervention to reduce imaging for low back pain: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2022; 8:249. [PMID: 36494716 PMCID: PMC9733261 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-022-01216-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2021] [Accepted: 11/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND General medical practitioner (GP) recruitment and subsequent data collection in clinical practice are challenging and may limit successful completion of a large-scale trial. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial to test an intervention to reduce non-indicated imaging for low back pain in general medical practice. METHODS A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial was performed, with recruitment of GPs and randomisation of GP clinics. All GPs attended a training session and were asked to record low back pain codes in electronic medical records for any low back pain presentations. Intervention group GPs were trained in the use of a patient education booklet to be used during low back pain patient visits. Control group GPs provided usual care. Outcomes for the proposed trial were collected to determine feasibility. GP recruitment was assessed as the proportion of GPs approached who consented to participate. Low back pain imaging outcomes were collected from electronic medical records (counts of patients presenting with low back pain) and from Australian healthcare administrative (Medicare) data (counts of imaging use). GP compliance with study procedures was assessed and qualitative data reported. RESULTS Thirty-four GP clinics were approached, with four participating (12%). At these clinics, 13/19 (68%) GPs consented to participate, and 10/19 (53%) started the study. Outcome data were collected from medical records for all GPs. Three GPs (30%) withdrew consent to access Medicare data, limiting reporting of imaging outcome measures. Three GPs (30%) self-reported low compliance entering low back pain codes. CONCLUSIONS This pilot cluster randomised controlled trial demonstrated the feasibility of many aspects of a full-scale effectiveness study, while also identifying a number of challenges that need to be resolved. Recommendations related to GP recruitment, study compliance, data collection, and outcome measures were made to increase the success of a future trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR), Trial ID: ACTRN12619000991112; Registered 11 July 2019, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376973.
Collapse
|
14
|
Belavy DL, Tagliaferri SD, Buntine P, Saueressig T, Ehrenbrusthoff K, Chen X, Diwan A, Miller CT, Owen PJ. Interventions for promoting evidence-based guideline-consistent surgery in low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2022; 31:2851-2865. [PMID: 36114891 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07378-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2022] [Revised: 07/09/2022] [Accepted: 09/02/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Examine the effectiveness of interventions to approach guideline-adherent surgical referrals for low back pain assessed via systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS Five databases (10 September 2021), Google Scholar, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were searched and forward and backward citation tracking of included studies were implemented. Randomised controlled/clinical trials in adults with low back pain of interventions to optimise surgery rates or referrals to surgery or secondary referral were included. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane ROB2 tool and evidence certainty via Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A random effects meta-analysis with a Paule Mandel estimator plus Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method was used to calculate the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval, respectively. RESULTS Of 886 records, 6 studies were included (N = 258,329) participants; cluster sizes ranged from 4 to 54. Five studies were rated as low risk of bias and one as having some concerns. Two studies reporting spine surgery referral or rates could only be pooled via combination of p values and gave evidence for a reduction (p = 0.021, Fisher's method, risk of bias: low). This did not persist with sensitivity analysis (p = 0.053). For secondary referral, meta-analysis revealed a non-significant odds ratio of 1.07 (95% CI [0.55, 2.06], I2 = 73.0%, n = 4 studies, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation [GRADE] evidence certainty: very low). CONCLUSION Few RCTs exist for interventions to improve guideline-adherent spine surgery rates or referral. Clinician education in isolation may not be effective. Future RCTs should consider organisational and/or policy level interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION CRD42020215137.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel L Belavy
- Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Applied Health Sciences, Hochschule Für Gesundheit (University of Applied Sciences), Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany.
| | - Scott D Tagliaferri
- School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Paul Buntine
- Emergency Department, Box Hill Hospital, Eastern Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Katja Ehrenbrusthoff
- School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Xiaolong Chen
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Service, St. George Hospital, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Ashish Diwan
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Service, St. George Hospital, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Clint T Miller
- School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Patrick J Owen
- School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Furlong B, Etchegary H, Aubrey-Bassler K, Swab M, Pike A, Hall A. Patient education materials for non-specific low back pain and sciatica: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0274527. [PMID: 36223377 PMCID: PMC9555681 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2022] [Accepted: 08/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Guidelines recommend patient education materials (PEMs) for low back pain (LBP), but no systematic review has assessed PEMs on their own. We investigated the effectiveness of PEMs on process, clinical, and health system outcomes for LBP and sciatica. METHODS Systematic searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, trial registries and grey literature through OpenGrey. We included randomized controlled trials of PEMs for LBP. Data extraction, risk of bias, and quality of evidence gradings were performed independently by two reviewers. Standardized mean differences or risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, and effect sizes pooled using random-effects models. Analyses of acute/subacute LBP were performed separately from chronic LBP at immediate, short, medium, and long-term (6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks, respectively). RESULTS 27 studies were identified. Compared to usual care for chronic LBP, we found moderate to low-quality evidence that PEMs improved pain intensity at immediate (SMD = -0.16 [95% CI: -0.29, -0.03]), short (SMD = -0.44 [95% CI: -0.88, 0.00]), medium (SMD = -0.53 [95% CI: -1.01, -0.05]), and long-term (SMD = -0.21 [95% CI: -0.41, -0.01]), medium-term disability (SMD = -0.32 [95% CI: -0.61, -0.03]), quality of life at short (SMD = -0.17 [95% CI: -0.30, -0.04]) and medium-term (SMD = -0.23 [95% CI: -0.41, -0.04]) and very low-quality evidence that PEMs improved global improvement ratings at immediate (SMD = -0.40 [95% CI: -0.58, -0.21]), short (SMD = -0.42 [95% CI: -0.60, -0.24]), medium (SMD = -0.46 [95% CI: -0.65, -0.28]), and long-term (SMD = -0.43 [95% CI: -0.61, -0.24]). We found very low-quality evidence that PEMs improved pain self-efficacy at immediate (SMD = -0.21 [95% CI: -0.39, -0.03]), short (SMD = -0.25 [95% CI: -0.43, -0.06]), medium (SMD = -0.23 [95% CI: -0.41, -0.05]), and long-term (SMD = -0.32 [95% CI: -0.50, -0.13]), and reduced medium-term fear-avoidance beliefs (SMD = -0.24 [95% CI: -0.43, -0.06]) and long-term stress (SMD = -0.21 [95% CI: -0.39, -0.03]). Compared to usual care for acute LBP, we found high to moderate-quality evidence that PEMs improved short-term pain intensity (SMD = -0.24 [95% CI: -0.42, -0.06]) and immediate-term quality of life (SMD = -0.24 [95% CI: -0.42, -0.07]). We found low to very low-quality evidence that PEMs increased knowledge at immediate (SMD = -0.51 [95% CI: -0.72, -0.31]), short (SMD = -0.48 [95% CI: -0.90, -0.05]), and long-term (RR = 1.28 [95% CI: 1.10, 1.49]) and pain self-efficacy at short (SMD = -0.78 [95% CI: -0.98, -0.58]) and long-term (SMD = -0.32 [95% CI: -0.52, -0.12]). We found moderate to very low-quality evidence that PEMs reduced short-term days off work (SMD = -0.35 [95% CI: -0.63, -0.08]), long-term imaging referrals (RR = 0.60 [95% CI: 0.41, 0.89]), and long-term physician visits (SMD = -0.16 [95% CI: -0.26, -0.05]). Compared to other interventions (e.g., yoga, Pilates), PEMs had no effect or were less effective for acute/subacute and chronic LBP. CONCLUSIONS There was a high degree of variability across outcomes and time points, but providing PEMs appears favorable to usual care as we observed many small, positive patient and system impacts for acute/subacute and chronic LBP. PEMs were generally less effective than other interventions; however, no cost effectiveness analyses were performed to weigh the relative benefits of these interventions to the likely less costly PEMs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bradley Furlong
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Holly Etchegary
- Clinical Epidemiology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Kris Aubrey-Bassler
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Michelle Swab
- Health Sciences Library, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Andrea Pike
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Amanda Hall
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Loza E, Carmona L, Woolf A, Fautrel B, Courvoisier DS, Verstappen S, Aarrestad Provan S, Boonen A, Vliet Vlieland T, Marchiori F, Jasinski T, Van der Elst K, Ndosi M, Dziedzic K, Carrasco JM. Implementation of recommendations in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: considerations for development and uptake. Ann Rheum Dis 2022; 81:1344-1347. [PMID: 35961760 DOI: 10.1136/ard-2022-223016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
A clinical guideline is a document with the aim of guiding decisions based on evidence regarding diagnosis, management and treatment in specific areas of healthcare. Specific to rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), adherence to clinical guidelines recommendations impacts the outcomes of people with these diseases. However, currently, the implementation of recommendations is less than optimal in rheumatology.The WHO has described the implementation of evidence-based recommendations as one of the greatest challenges facing the global health community and has identified the importance of scaling up these recommendations. But closing the evidence-to-practice gap is often complex, time-consuming and difficult. In this context, the implementation science offers a framework to overcome this scenario.This article describes the principles of implementation science to facilitate and optimise the implementation of clinical recommendations in RMDs. Embedding implementation science methods and techniques into recommendation development and daily practice can help maximise the likelihood that implementation is successful in improving the quality of healthcare and healthcare services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Estibaliz Loza
- Instituto de Salud Musculoesquelética (Inmusc), Madrid, Spain
| | - Loreto Carmona
- Instituto de Salud Musculoesquelética (Inmusc), Madrid, Spain
| | - Anthony Woolf
- Bone and Joint Research Group, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, UK
| | - Bruno Fautrel
- Rheumatology, Pitie Salpetriere Hospital - Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France
- INSERM UMRS 1136, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | | | - Suzanne Verstappen
- Centre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, MRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | | | - Annelies Boonen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastrich University Medical Center+, Maastricht, Netherlands
- CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Thea Vliet Vlieland
- Orthopaedics, Rehabilitation and Physical Therapy, J11, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Mwidimi Ndosi
- School of Health and Social Wellbeing, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
- Academic Rheumatology, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Krysia Dziedzic
- Impact Accelerator Unit, School of Medicine, Keele University, Newcastle, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
O’Connor DA, Glasziou P, Maher CG, McCaffery KJ, Schram D, Maguire B, Ma R, Billot L, Gorelik A, Traeger AC, Albarqouni L, Checketts J, Vyas P, Clark B, Buchbinder R. Effect of an Individualized Audit and Feedback Intervention on Rates of Musculoskeletal Diagnostic Imaging Requests by Australian General Practitioners: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2022; 328:850-860. [PMID: 36066518 PMCID: PMC9449798 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.14587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Audit and feedback can improve professional practice, but few trials have evaluated its effectiveness in reducing potential overuse of musculoskeletal diagnostic imaging in general practice. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and feedback for reducing musculoskeletal imaging by high-requesting Australian general practitioners (GPs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This factorial cluster-randomized clinical trial included 2271 general practices with at least 1 GP who was in the top 20% of referrers for 11 imaging tests (of the lumbosacral or cervical spine, shoulder, hip, knee, and ankle/hind foot) and for at least 4 individual tests between January and December 2018. Only high-requesting GPs within participating practices were included. The trial was conducted between November 2019 and May 2021, with final follow-up on May 8, 2021. INTERVENTIONS Eligible practices were randomized in a 1:1:1:1:1 ratio to 1 of 4 different individualized written audit and feedback interventions (n = 3055 GPs) that varied factorially by (1) frequency of feedback (once vs twice) and (2) visual display (standard vs enhanced display highlighting highly requested tests) or to a control condition of no intervention (n = 764 GPs). Participants were not masked. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the overall rate of requests for the 11 targeted imaging tests per 1000 patient consultations over 12 months, assessed using routinely collected administrative data. Primary analyses included all randomized GPs who had at least 1 patient consultation during the study period and were performed by statisticians masked to group allocation. RESULTS A total of 3819 high-requesting GPs from 2271 practices were randomized, and 3660 GPs (95.8%; n = 727 control, n = 2933 intervention) were included in the primary analysis. Audit and feedback led to a statistically significant reduction in the overall rate of imaging requests per 1000 consultations compared with control over 12 months (adjusted mean, 27.7 [95% CI, 27.5-28.0] vs 30.4 [95% CI, 29.8-30.9], respectively; adjusted mean difference, -2.66 [95% CI, -3.24 to -2.07]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among Australian general practitioners known to frequently request musculoskeletal diagnostic imaging, an individualized audit and feedback intervention, compared with no intervention, significantly decreased the rate of targeted musculoskeletal imaging tests ordered over 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12619001503112.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Denise A. O’Connor
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Malvern, Victoria, Australia
| | - Paul Glasziou
- Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia
| | - Christopher G. Maher
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District and The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kirsten J. McCaffery
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Dina Schram
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Brigit Maguire
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Robert Ma
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Laurent Billot
- The George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Newtown, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Alexandra Gorelik
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Malvern, Victoria, Australia
| | - Adrian C. Traeger
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District and The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Loai Albarqouni
- Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia
| | - Juliet Checketts
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Parima Vyas
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Brett Clark
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Rachelle Buchbinder
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Malvern, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Rindal DB, Kottke TE, Jurkovich MW, Asche SE, Enstad CJ, Truitt AR, Ziegenfuss JY, Romito LM, Thyvalikakath TP, O'Donnell J, Spallek H. FINDINGS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS FROM A SMOKING CESSATION TRIAL UTILIZING A CLINICAL DECISION SUPPORT TOOL. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2022; 22:101747. [PMID: 36162898 PMCID: PMC11581356 DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2022] [Revised: 04/05/2022] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of disease, death, and disability in the United States. Dental practitioners are advised to provide evidence-based smoking cessation interventions to their patients, yet dental practitioners frequently fail to deliver brief smoking cessation advice. OBJECTIVES To test whether giving dental practitioners a clinical decisions support (CDS) system embedded in their electronic dental record would increase the rate at which patients who smoke (1) report receiving a brief intervention or referral to treatment during a recent dental visit, (2) taking action related to smoking cessation within 7 days of visit, and (3) stop smoking for 1 day or more or reduce the amount smoked by 50% within 6 months. METHODS Two-group, parallel arm, cluster-randomized trial. From March through December 2019, 15 nonacademic primary care dental clinics were randomized via covariate adaptive randomization to either a usual care arm or the CDS arm. Adult smokers completed an initial telephone survey within 7 days of their visit and another survey after 6 months. RESULTS Forty-three patients from 5 CDS and 13 patients from 2 usual care clinics completed the 7-day survey. While the proportion of patients who reported receipt of a brief intervention or referral to treatment was significantly greater in the CDS arm than the usual care arm (84.3% vs 58.6%; P = .005), the differences in percentage of patients who took any action related to smoking cessation within 7 days (44.4% vs 22.3%; P = .077), or stopped smoking for one day or more and/or reduced amount smoked by 50% within 6 months (63.1% vs 46.2%; P = .405) were large but not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Despite interruption by COVID-19, these results demonstrate a promising approach to assist dental practitioners in providing their patients with smoking cessation screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Laura M Romito
- Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | | | - Jean O'Donnell
- University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Heiko Spallek
- The University of Sydney School of Dentistry, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Mishra M, Pickett M, Weiskopf NG. The Role of Informatics in Implementing Guidelines for Chronic Opioid Therapy Risk Assessment in Primary Care: A Narrative Review Informed by the Socio-Technical Model. Stud Health Technol Inform 2022; 290:447-451. [PMID: 35673054 PMCID: PMC10128894 DOI: 10.3233/shti220115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/12/2023]
Abstract
Approximately 2 million Americans live with opioid use disorder (OUD), most of whom also have chronic pain. The economic burden of chronic pain and prescription opioid misuse runs into billions of dollars. Patients on prescription opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) are at increased risk for OUD and overdose. By adhering to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) opioid prescribing guidelines, primary care providers (PCPs) have the potential to improve patient outcomes. But numerous provider, patient, and practice-specific factors challenge adherence to guidelines in primary care. Many of the barriers may be mediated by informatics interventions, but gaps in knowledge and unmet needs exist. This narrative review examines the risk assessment and harm reduction process in a socio-technical context to highlight the gaps in knowledge and unmet needs that can be mediated through informatics intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meenakshi Mishra
- Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Mary Pickett
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Nicole G. Weiskopf
- Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the effectiveness of implementing interventions to improve guideline-recommended imaging referrals in low back pain. DESIGN Systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to June 14, 2021, as well as Google Scholar and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews published in the last 10 years. We conducted forward and backward citation tracking. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled or clinical trials in adults with low back pain to improve imaging referrals. DATA SYNTHESIS Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data were synthesized using narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analysis (Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS Of the 2719 identified records, 8 trials were included, with 6 studies eligible for meta-analysis (participants: N = 170 460). All trials incorporated clinician education; 4 included audit and/or feedback components. Comparators were no-intervention control and passive dissemination of guidelines. Five trials were rated as low risk of bias, and 2 trials were rated as having some concerns. There was low-certainty evidence that implementing interventions to improve guideline-recommended imaging referrals had no effect (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.87 [0.72, 1.05]; I2 = 0%; studies: n = 6). The main finding was robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION We found low-certainty evidence that interventions to reduce imaging referrals or use in low back pain had no effect. Education interventions are unlikely to be effective. Organizational- and policy-level interventions are more likely to be effective. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(4):175-191. Epub 05 Feb 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10731.
Collapse
|
21
|
Belavy DL, Tagliaferri SD, Buntine P, Saueressig T, Sadler K, Ko C, Miller CT, Owen PJ. Clinician education unlikely effective for guideline-adherent medication prescription in low back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. EClinicalMedicine 2022; 43:101193. [PMID: 35028542 PMCID: PMC8741480 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101193] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2021] [Revised: 10/21/2021] [Accepted: 10/22/2021] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Effectiveness of implementing interventions to optimise guideline-recommended medical prescription in low back pain is not well established. METHODS A systematic review and random-effects meta-analyses for dichotomous outcomes with a Paule-Mandel estimator. Five databases and reference lists were searched from inception to 4th August 2021. Randomised controlled/clinical trials in adults with low back pain to optimise medication prescription were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and GRADE were implemented. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42020219767). FINDINGS Of 3352 unique records identified in the search, seven studies were included and five were eligible for meta-analysis (N=11339 participants). Six of seven studies incorporated clinician education, three studies included audit/feedback components and one study implemented changes in medical records systems. Via meta-analysis, we estimated a non-significant odds-ratio of 0·94 (95% CI (0·77; 1.16), I² = 0%; n=5 studies, GRADE: low) in favour of the intervention group. The main finding was robust to sensitivity analyses. INTERPRETATION There is low quality evidence that existing interventions to optimise medication prescription or usage in back pain had no impact. Peer-to-peer education alone does not appear to lead to behaviour change. Organisational and policy interventions may be more effective. FUNDING This work was supported by internal institutional funding only.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel L Belavy
- Hochschule für Gesundheit (University of Applied Sciences), Department of Applied Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany
- Corresponding author. Prof. Daniel L Belavy, Hochschule für Gesundheit (University of Applied Sciences), Department of Applied Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany. Tel: +49 234 77727 632
| | - Scott D Tagliaferri
- Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
| | - Paul Buntine
- Eastern Health, Box Hill Hospital, Emergency Department, 5 Arnold St, Box Hill, Victoria 3128, Australia
- Monash University, Eastern Health Clinical School, Level 2, 5 Arnold Street, Box Hill, Victoria 3128, Australia
| | | | - Kate Sadler
- Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
| | - Christy Ko
- Eastern Health, Box Hill Hospital, Emergency Department, 5 Arnold St, Box Hill, Victoria 3128, Australia
| | - Clint T Miller
- Deakin University, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
| | - Patrick J Owen
- Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sharma S, Traeger AC, Tcharkhedian E, Middleton PM, Cullen L, Maher CG. Effect of a waiting room communication strategy on imaging rates and awareness of public health messages for low back pain. Int J Qual Health Care 2021; 33:6384520. [PMID: 34623440 DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzab129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Revised: 07/22/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Few studies have investigated the effects of waiting room communication strategies on health-care behavior. OBJECTIVE We aimed to determine the effect of a waiting room communication strategy, designed to raise awareness of potential harms of unnecessary imaging, on lumbar imaging rates in the emergency department (ED). METHODS We conducted a controlled experimental study with a replicated time series design. The design included a 6-week run-in time. Following this there were alternating 1-week intervention and control periods. The intervention group received a communication strategy describing the potential harms of unnecessary imaging for low back pain, shown on a 55" LCD screen positioned in the ED waiting room. The communication strategy was designed by a creative innovation agency and included five digital posters and a patient leaflet. The control group received standard messaging for the waiting room at the time, shown on the same 55" LCD screen, and access to the patient leaflet. The primary outcome was the number and proportion of people presenting to ED with low back pain who received at least one lumbar imaging test, measured using routinely collected ED data. Secondary patient-reported outcomes (patient satisfaction and awareness of campaign messages) were collected from a sample of people presenting for any condition who responded to a text-message-based survey. RESULTS For the imaging outcome, 337 people presenting to ED with low back pain were included over a 4-month period (intervention n = 99; control n = 238). All had available data on lumbar imaging. Use of lumbar imaging was 25% in those exposed to the communication strategy [95% confidence interval (CI) = 18% to 35%] compared with 29% in those exposed to the standard waiting room messaging [95% CI = 23% to 35%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.41]. For the patient-reported outcomes, 349 patients presenting to ED for any condition responded to the survey (intervention n = 170; control n = 179; response rate = 33%). There was uncertain evidence that the intervention increased awareness of the communication strategy leaflet (OR = 2.00, 95% CI = 0.90 to 4.47). Other measures did not suggest between-group differences in patient satisfaction or awareness of the campaign messages. CONCLUSION A communication strategy displayed in the ED waiting room may slightly reduce the proportion of patients with low back pain who receive lumbar imaging, although there is uncertainty due to imprecision. The campaign did not appear to increase awareness of campaign messages or affect patient satisfaction in a sample of patients presenting to the ED for any reason. Larger studies should investigate whether simple, low-cost waiting room communication strategies can raise awareness of unnecessary healthcare and influence health-care quality. TRIAL REGISTRATION ACTRN12620000300976, 05/03/2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sweekriti Sharma
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, New South Wales 2050, Australia.,School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia
| | - Adrian C Traeger
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, New South Wales 2050, Australia.,School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia
| | - Elise Tcharkhedian
- Department of Physiotherapy, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2170, Australia
| | - Paul M Middleton
- South Western Emergency Research Institute, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.,Discipline of Emergency Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
| | - Louise Cullen
- Emergency and Trauma Center, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia
| | - Chris G Maher
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, New South Wales 2050, Australia.,School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Forsetlund L, O'Brien MA, Forsén L, Reinar LM, Okwen MP, Horsley T, Rose CJ. Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 9:CD003030. [PMID: 34523128 PMCID: PMC8441047 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd003030.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Educational meetings are used widely by health personnel to provide continuing medical education and to promote implementation of innovations or translate new knowledge to change practice within healthcare systems. Previous reviews have concluded that educational meetings can result in small changes in behaviour, but that effects vary considerably. Investigations into which characteristics of educational meetings might lead to greater impact have yielded varying results, and factors that might explain heterogeneity in effects remain unclear. This is the second update of this Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES • To assess the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and healthcare outcomes • To investigate factors that might explain the heterogeneity of these effects SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, Science Citation Index Expanded (ISI Web of Knowledge), and Social Sciences Citation Index (last search in November 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA We sought randomised trials examining the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and patient outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. One review author assessed the certainty of evidence (GRADE) and discussed with a second review author. We included studies in the primary analysis that reported baseline data and that we judged to be at low or unclear risk of bias. For each comparison of dichotomous outcomes, we measured treatment effect as risk difference adjusted for baseline compliance. We expressed adjusted risk difference values as percentages, and we noted that values greater than zero favour educational meetings. For continuous outcomes, we measured treatment effect as per cent change relative to the control group mean post test, adjusted for baseline performance; we expressed values as percentages and noted that values greater than zero favour educational meetings. We report means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and, when appropriate, medians and interquartile ranges to facilitate comparisons to previous versions of this review. We analysed professional and patient outcomes separately and analysed 22 variables that were hypothesised a priori to explain heterogeneity. We explored heterogeneity by using univariate meta-regression and by inspecting violin plots. MAIN RESULTS We included 215 studies involving more than 28,167 health professionals, including 142 new studies for this update. Educational meetings as the single intervention or the main component of a multi-faceted intervention compared with no intervention • Probably slightly improve compliance with desired practice when compared with no intervention (65 comparisons, 7868 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 6.79%, 95% CI 6.62% to 6.97%; median 4.00%; interquartile range 0.29% to 13.00%); 28 comparisons, 2577 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 44.36%, 95% CI 41.98% to 46.75%; median 20.00%; interquartile range 6.00% to 65.00%)) • Probably slightly improve patient outcomes compared with no intervention (15 comparisons, 2530 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 3.30%, 95% CI 3.10% to 3.51%; median 0.10%; interquartile range 0.00% to 4.00%); 28 comparisons, 2294 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 8.35%, 95% CI 7.46% to 9.24%; median 2.00%; interquartile range -1.00% to 21.00%)) The certainty of evidence for this comparison is moderate. Educational meetings alone compared with other interventions • May improve compliance with desired practice when compared with other interventions (6 studies, 1402 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 9.99%, 95% CI 9.47% to 10.52%; median 16.5%; interquartile range 0.80% to 16.50%); 2 studies, 72 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 12.00%, 95% CI 9.16% to 14.84%; median 12.00%; interquartile range 0.00% to 24.00%)) No studies met the inclusion criteria for patient outcome measurements. The certainty of evidence for this comparison is low. Interactive educational meetings compared with didactic (lecture-based) educational meetings • We are uncertain of effects on compliance with desired practice (3 studies, 370 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes; 1 study, 192 health professionals for continuous outcomes) or on patient outcomes (1 study, 54 health professionals for continuous outcomes), as the certainty of evidence is very low Any other comparison of different formats and durations of educational meetings • We are uncertain of effects on compliance with desired practice (1 study, 19 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes; 1 study, 20 health professionals for continuous outcomes) or on patient outcomes (1 study, 113 health professionals for continuous outcomes), as the certainty of evidence is very low. Factors that might explain heterogeneity of effects Meta-regression suggests that larger estimates of effect are associated with studies judged to be at high risk of bias, with studies that had unit of analysis errors, and with studies in which the unit of analysis was the provider rather than the patient. Improved compliance with desired practice may be associated with: shorter meetings; poor baseline compliance; better attendance; shorter follow-up; professionals provided with additional take-home material; explicit building of educational meetings on theory; targeting of low- versus high-complexity behaviours; targeting of outcomes with high versus low importance; goal of increasing rather than decreasing behaviour; teaching by opinion leaders; and use of didactic versus interactive teaching methods. Pre-specified exploratory analyses of behaviour change techniques suggest that improved compliance with desired practice may be associated with use of a greater number of behaviour change techniques; goal-setting; provision of feedback; provision for social comparison; and provision for social support. Compliance may be decreased by the use of follow-up prompts, skills training, and barrier identification techniques. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Compared with no intervention, educational meetings as the main component of an intervention probably slightly improve professional practice and, to a lesser extent, patient outcomes. Educational meetings may improve compliance with desired practice to a greater extent than other kinds of behaviour change interventions, such as text messages, fees, or office systems. Our findings suggest that multi-strategy approaches might positively influence the effects of educational meetings. Additional trials of educational meetings compared with no intervention are unlikely to change the review findings; therefore we will not further update this review comparison in the future. However, we note that randomised trials comparing different types of education are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mary Ann O'Brien
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Lisa Forsén
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Mbah P Okwen
- Centre for the Development of Best Practices in Health (CDBPH), Yaoundé Central Hospital, Yaoundé, Cameroon
| | - Tanya Horsley
- Research Unit, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Hall A, Richmond H, Pike A, Lawrence R, Etchegary H, Swab M, Thompson JY, Albury C, Hayden J, Patey AM, Matthews J. What behaviour change techniques have been used to improve adherence to evidence-based low back pain imaging? Implement Sci 2021; 16:68. [PMID: 34215284 PMCID: PMC8254222 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-021-01136-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2020] [Accepted: 06/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Despite international guideline recommendations, low back pain (LBP) imaging rates have been increasing over the last 20 years. Previous systematic reviews report limited effectiveness of implementation interventions aimed at reducing unnecessary LBP imaging. No previous reviews have analysed these implementation interventions to ascertain what behaviour change techniques (BCTs) have been used in this field. Understanding what techniques have been implemented in this field is an essential first step before exploring intervention effectiveness. Methods We searched EMBASE, Ovid (Medline), CINAHL and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to February 1, 2021, as well as and hand-searched 6 relevant systematic reviews and conducted citation tracking of included studies. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility and extracted data on study and intervention characteristics. Study interventions were qualitatively analysed by three coders to identify BCTs, which were mapped to mechanisms of action from the theoretical domains framework (TDF) using the Theory and Techniques Tool. Results We identified 36 eligible studies from 1984 citations in our electronic search and a further 2 studies from hand-searching resulting in 38 studies that targeted physician behaviour to reduce unnecessary LBP imaging. The studies were conducted in 6 countries in primary (n = 31) or emergency care (n = 7) settings. Thirty-four studies were included in our BCT synthesis which found the most frequently used BCTs were ‘4.1 instruction on how to perform the behaviour’ (e.g. Active/passive guideline dissemination and/or educational seminars/workshops), followed by ‘9.1 credible source’, ‘2.2 feedback on behaviour’ (e.g. electronic feedback reports on physicians’ image ordering) and 7.1 prompts and cues (electronic decision support or hard-copy posters/booklets for the office). This review highlighted that the majority of studies used education and/or feedback on behaviour to target the domains of knowledge and in some cases also skills and beliefs about capabilities to bring about a change in LBP imaging behaviour. Additionally, we found there to be a growing use of electronic or hard copy reminders to target the domains of memory and environmental context and resources. Conclusions This is the first study to identify what BCTs have been used to target a reduction in physician image ordering behaviour. The majority of included studies lacked the use of theory to inform their intervention design and failed to target known physician-reported barriers to following LBP imaging guidelines. Protocol Registation PROSPERO CRD42017072518 Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01136-w.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Hall
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, 300 Prince Phillip Drive, St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3V6, Canada.
| | - Helen Richmond
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, 300 Prince Phillip Drive, St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Andrea Pike
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, 300 Prince Phillip Drive, St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Rebecca Lawrence
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, 300 Prince Phillip Drive, St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Holly Etchegary
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, 300 Prince Phillip Drive, St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Michelle Swab
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, 300 Prince Phillip Drive, St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Jacqueline Y Thompson
- Public Health, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Charlotte Albury
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England
| | - Jill Hayden
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Andrea M Patey
- Centre for Implementation Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - James Matthews
- School of Public Health, Physiotherapy & Sports Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Viglione J, Labrecque RM. Core Correctional Practices in Community Supervision: An Evaluation of a Policy Mandate to Increase Probation Officer Use of Skills. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OFFENDER THERAPY AND COMPARATIVE CRIMINOLOGY 2021; 65:858-881. [PMID: 33292016 DOI: 10.1177/0306624x20981045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
Community supervision officer training programs aim to translate core correctional practices into routine practice. These training programs emphasize skill-building designed to shift supervision strategies from law enforcement/compliance-oriented to a focus on promoting and supporting behavior change. Despite evidence of their effectiveness, research finds trained officers use newly learned skills infrequently. The current study examined the impact of a policy, implemented post-training, designed to encourage trained officers to use skills emphasized by the Staff Training Aimed at Reducing Rearrest (STARR) training program more frequently. The current study examined the effectiveness of this policy on the frequency and type of skills used by officers in their interactions with individuals on their caseload. Analyses suggested the policy mandate was effective in increasing skill use, however officers still used trained skills in less than half of their interactions. Implications and considerations for increasing the use of skills are discussed.
Collapse
|
26
|
Sorondo D, Delpierre C, Côté P, Salmi LR, Cedraschi C, Taylor-Vaisey A, Lemeunier N. Determinants of clinical practice guidelines' utilization for the management of musculoskeletal disorders: a scoping review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2021; 22:507. [PMID: 34074285 PMCID: PMC8170973 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04204-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2020] [Accepted: 03/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
CONTEXT Many clinical practice guidelines have been developed for the management of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). However, there is a gap between evidence-based knowledge and clinical practice, and reasons are poorly understood. Understanding why healthcare providers use clinical practice guidelines is essential to improve their implementation, dissemination, and adherence. AIM To identify determinants of clinical practice guidelines' utilization by health care providers involved in the assessment and management of MSDs. METHOD A scoping review of the literature was conducted. Three databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Article identification, study design, methodological quality, type of healthcare providers, MSDs, barriers and facilitators associated with guidelines' utilization were extracted from selected articles. RESULTS 8671 citations were retrieved, and 43 articles were selected. 51% of studies were from Europe, and most were quantitative studies (64%) following a cross-sectional design (88%). Almost 80% of articles dealt with low back pain guidelines, and the most studied healthcare providers were general practitioners or physiotherapists. Five main barriers to guideline utilization were expressed by providers: 1) disagreement between recommendations and patient expectations; 2) guidelines not specific to individual patients; 3) unfamiliarity with "non-specific" term, or with the bio psychosocial model of MSDs; 4) time consuming; and 5) heterogeneity in guideline methods. Four main facilitators to guideline utilization were cited: 1) clinician's interest in evidence-based practice; 2) perception from clinicians that the guideline will improve triage, diagnosis and management; 3) time efficiency; and 4) standardized language. CONCLUSION Identifying modifiable determinants is the first step in developing implementation strategies to improve guideline utilization in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delphine Sorondo
- UMR1295, Toulouse III University, Inserm, Equipe EQUITY, Equipe constitutive du CERPOP, Toulouse, France
- Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropraxie, 72 chemin de la Flambère-31,300, Toulouse, France
| | - Cyrille Delpierre
- UMR1295, Toulouse III University, Inserm, Equipe EQUITY, Equipe constitutive du CERPOP, Toulouse, France
| | - Pierre Côté
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Ontario Tech University, Oshawa, Ontario Canada
- Centre for Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation at Ontario Tech University and the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Oshawa and Toronto, Ontario Canada
| | - Louis-Rachid Salmi
- Univ. Bordeaux, ISPED, Centre INSERM U1219-Bordeaux Population Health, F-33000 Bordeaux, France
- CHU de Bordeaux, Pôle de santé publique, Service d’Information Médicale, F-33000 Bordeaux, France
| | - Christine Cedraschi
- Division of General Medical Rehabilitation, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Multidisciplinary Pain Centre, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Anne Taylor-Vaisey
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Ontario Tech University, Oshawa, Ontario Canada
- Centre for Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation at Ontario Tech University and the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Oshawa and Toronto, Ontario Canada
| | - Nadège Lemeunier
- UMR1295, Toulouse III University, Inserm, Equipe EQUITY, Equipe constitutive du CERPOP, Toulouse, France
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Ontario Tech University, Oshawa, Ontario Canada
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Stephens M, Bartley C, Samuriwo R, Stubbs N. Evaluating the impact of the Tissue Viability Seating guidelines. J Tissue Viability 2021; 30:3-8. [PMID: 33390309 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2020.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2020] [Revised: 11/21/2020] [Accepted: 12/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Internationally, guidelines are developed to ensure safe, effective, person centred, timely, efficient, and effective practice. However, their use in clinical practice is found to be variable. The Tissue Viability Society (TVS) published updated seating guidelines in 2017, yet, little is known about how these guidelines are being used. METHODS The aim of this evaluation was to gauge the impact of the Tissue Viability Seating Guidelines on clinical practice and policy. A cross-sectional questionnaire was used to elicit the responses from anyone with an interest or role within seating and pressure ulcer prevention and management. The survey was distributed through a variety of methods including email to members of the Tissue Viability Society and social media platforms from September to December 2019. RESULTS and Discussion: There were thirty-nine responses, the bulk of which were from healthcare professionals across primary and secondary care. All but one respondent was from the United Kingdom. Eleven had incorporated the latest TVS seating guidance into policy and sixteen into practice. The results of our survey demonstrates congruence with the literature as the main themes that emerged included incorporating the guidance into everyday clinical practice, education, and training, and as a resource or dissemination tool. Barriers to implementation included being unaware of the guidelines and unaware of one's own professional and collective organisational responsibility to guideline dissemination. However, many respondents were planning to incorporate the guidelines using a variety of methods. CONCLUSION This survey has shown there are some examples of successful implementation of the TVS Seating guidelines. Future TVS guidelines should include implementation strategies, interventions, and goals for local champions to ensure barriers to implementation are both assessed and addressed. Future work could also include a trial of the guidelines within a pilot project.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melanie Stephens
- School of Health and Society, Mary Seacole Building, University of Salford, UK.
| | - Carol Bartley
- Occupational Therapist Rehab for Independence Ltd, Heskin, UK.
| | - Ray Samuriwo
- School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK; Wales Centre for Evidence Based Care, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
| | - Nikki Stubbs
- Interim Professional Lead for Nursing and Clinical Project Lead -Integrated Wound Care Project Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Kiel S, Raus C, Sierocinski E, Knauthe P, Chenot JF. Concordance of patient beliefs and expectations regarding the management of low back pain with guideline recommendations - a cross-sectional study in Germany. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE 2020; 21:275. [PMID: 33342429 PMCID: PMC7751122 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-020-01352-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2020] [Accepted: 12/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Background Low back pain is a common reason for patients to seek medical care. Physician non-adherence to clinical guidelines has been observed. We investigated the extent to which patient expectations correspond to recommendations of the German national guideline for management of low back pain (G-LBP) and whether patient characteristics, history of LBP and previous treatment experience are associated with expectations. Methods A cross-sectional study including patients from 13 general practices was conducted. Data were collected using a questionnaire. Inverse probability weights were used to address non-response bias. Descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. Results A total of 977 patients were included in analyses (median age 57 years, 39% male). 75% of patients reported experiencing LBP currently or within the last year. More than 65% indicated they would agree to forgo further examinations if their LBP was judged by their physician to be of no serious concern. This was associated with the highest level of education and no prior imaging, and negatively associated with good-to-poor health status and moderate-to-severe pain intensity. 40% of participants expected imaging. The highest educational level, female gender and no prior imaging were associated with a decreased expectation of imaging. 70% expected prescriptions for massages. Females, participants with good-to-poor health status, current LBP or LBP in the last 12 months had an increased expectation for massages. Expectations for injection therapy (45%) were mainly associated with previous injections. Expectations for physiotherapy (64%) were associated with female gender, lower educational level, good-to-poor health status, current LBP or in the last 12 months. The perspective that daily activities should be continued (66%) was associated with female gender and higher educational level. Participants who agreed to the statement ‘There is no effective treatment for LBP’ (11%) had a poor health status, current LBP and a severe pain intensity. Conclusion Patient views regarding LBP management are partially concordant with guideline recommendations and are strongly influenced by previous treatment experiences and education level. Exploration of patient expectations and experiences in LBP treatment may help minimize dissatisfaction of patients expecting treatments not endorsed by guidelines and simultaneously increase physician guideline adherence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Kiel
- Department of General Practice, Institute of Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Fleischmannstraße 6, 17475, Greifswald, Germany.
| | - Christina Raus
- Department of General Practice, Institute of Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Fleischmannstraße 6, 17475, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Elizabeth Sierocinski
- Department of General Practice, Institute of Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Fleischmannstraße 6, 17475, Greifswald, Germany
| | | | - Jean-François Chenot
- Department of General Practice, Institute of Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Fleischmannstraße 6, 17475, Greifswald, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2020; 70:e858-e865. [PMID: 33199293 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20x713693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2020] [Accepted: 06/03/2020] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is recognised that medical tests are overused in primary care; however, it is unclear how best to reduce their use. AIM To identify which strategies are effective in reducing the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic review. METHOD The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Rx for Change were searched (January 1990 to November 2019) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. Two reviewers selected eligible RCTs, extracted data, and assessed their risk of bias. RESULTS Of the 16 RCTs included in the review, 11 reported a statistically significant reduction in the use of low-value medical tests. The median of the differences between the relative reductions in the intervention and control arms was 17% (interquartile range 12% to 24%). Strategies using reminders or audit/feedback showed larger reduction than those without these components (22% versus 14%, and 22% versus 13%, respectively) and patient-targeted strategies showed larger reductions than those not targeted at patients (51% versus 17%). Very few studies investigated the sustainability of the effect, adverse events, cost-effectiveness, or patient-reported outcomes related to reducing the use of low-value tests. CONCLUSION This review indicates that it is possible to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care, especially by using multiple components including reminders, audit/feedback, and patient-targeted interventions. To implement these strategies widely in primary care settings, more research is needed not only to investigate their effectiveness, but also to examine adverse events, cost-effectiveness, and patient-reported outcomes.
Collapse
|
30
|
Traeger AC, Checketts J, Tcharkhedian E, O'Connor DA, Klinner C, Sharma S, Vyas P, Albarqouni L, McCaffery K. Patient and general practitioner views of tools to delay diagnostic imaging for low back pain: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e039936. [PMID: 33162393 PMCID: PMC7651716 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039936] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Delayed prescribing is a promising strategy to manage patient requests for unnecessary tests and treatments. The purpose of this study was to explore general practitioner (GP) and patient views of three communication tools (Overdiagnosis Leaflet, Dialogue Sheet and 'Wait-and-see' Note) to support delayed prescribing of diagnostic imaging. DESIGN Qualitative study. SETTING Primary and emergency care in Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS 16 GPs and 14 patients with recent episode of low back pain. OUTCOME Views on the tools to delay diagnostic imaging for low back pain. Data were collected using a combination of focus groups and individual interviews. ANALYSIS Two researchers independently performed a thematic analysis, and the author team reviewed and refined the analysis. RESULTS GP participants responded positively to the Overdiagnosis Leaflet. The Dialogue Sheet and 'Wait-and-see' Note raised several concerns about patient pushback, adding to time pressure and being overwhelmed with hard-to-find paper resources. GPs preferred to communicate verbally the reasons to delay an imaging test. For patients, the reactions to the tools were more positive. Patients valued written information and a signed agreement to delay the test. However, patients expressed that a strong desire for diagnostic imaging would likely over-ride any effect of written advice to delay the test. The term 'false alarm' to describe overdiagnosis was poorly understood by patients. CONCLUSIONS GPs and patients agreed that a leaflet about overdiagnosis could support a delayed prescribing approach to imaging for low back pain. The Dialogue Sheet and 'Wait-and-see' Note were acceptable to patients but not to GPs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adrian C Traeger
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Juliet Checketts
- Australian Government Department of Health, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Elise Tcharkhedian
- Department of Physiotherapy, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Denise A O'Connor
- Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute, Malvern, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Christiane Klinner
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sweekriti Sharma
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Parima Vyas
- Australian Government Department of Health, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Loai Albarqouni
- Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
| | - Kirsten McCaffery
- School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Yoong SL, Hall A, Stacey F, Grady A, Sutherland R, Wyse R, Anderson A, Nathan N, Wolfenden L. Nudge strategies to improve healthcare providers' implementation of evidence-based guidelines, policies and practices: a systematic review of trials included within Cochrane systematic reviews. Implement Sci 2020; 15:50. [PMID: 32611354 PMCID: PMC7329401 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01011-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2020] [Accepted: 06/16/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nudge interventions are those that seek to modify the social and physical environment to enhance capacity for subconscious behaviours that align with the intrinsic values of an individual, without actively restricting options. This study sought to describe the application and effects of nudge strategies on clinician implementation of health-related guidelines, policies and practices within studies included in relevant Cochrane systematic reviews. METHODS As there is varied terminology used to describe nudge, this study examined studies within relevant systematic reviews. A two-stage screening process was undertaken where, firstly, all systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library between 2016 and 2018 were screened to identify reviews that included quantitative studies to improve implementation of guidelines among healthcare providers. Secondly, individual studies within relevant systematic reviews were included if they were (i) randomised controlled trials (RCTs), (ii) included a nudge strategy in at least one intervention arm, and (iii) explicitly aimed to improve clinician implementation behaviour. We categorised nudge strategies into priming, salience and affect, default, incentives, commitment and ego, and norms and messenger based on the Mindspace framework. SYNTHESIS The number and percentage of trials using each nudge strategy was calculated. Due to substantial heterogeneity, we did not undertake a meta-analysis. Instead, we calculated within-study point estimates and 95% confidence intervals, and used a vote-counting approach to explore effects. RESULTS Seven reviews including 42 trials reporting on 57 outcomes were included. The most common nudge strategy was priming (69%), then norms and messenger (40%). Of the 57 outcomes, 86% had an effect on clinician behaviour in the hypothesised direction, and 53% of those were statistically significant. For continuous outcomes, the median effect size was 0.39 (0.22, 0.45), while for dichotomous outcomes the median Odds Ratio was 1.62 (1.13, 2.76). CONCLUSIONS This review of 42 RCTs included in Cochrane systematic reviews found that the impact of nudge strategies on clinician behaviour was at least comparable to other interventions targeting implementation of evidence-based guidelines. While uncertainty remains, the review provides justification for ongoing investigation of the evaluation and application of nudge interventions to support provider behaviour change. TRIAL REGISTRATION This review was not prospectively registered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sze Lin Yoong
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia.
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia.
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia.
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia.
| | - Alix Hall
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
| | - Fiona Stacey
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia
| | - Alice Grady
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
| | - Rachel Sutherland
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
| | - Rebecca Wyse
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
| | - Amy Anderson
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
| | - Nicole Nathan
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
| | - Luke Wolfenden
- Hunter New England Population Health, University of Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, New South Wales, 2287, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, 2300, Australia
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, 2308, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Gransjøen AM, Wiig S, Lysdahl KB, Hofmann BM. Health care personnel's perception of guideline implementation for musculoskeletal imaging: a process evaluation. BMC Health Serv Res 2020; 20:397. [PMID: 32393317 PMCID: PMC7212587 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-020-05272-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2020] [Accepted: 04/29/2020] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The increasing complexity and variability in radiology have significantly fueled the need for guidelines. There are many methods for disseminating and implementing guidelines however; and obtaining lasting changes has been difficult. Implementation outcome is usually measured in a decrease in unwarranted examinations, and qualitative data are rarely used. This study’s aim was to evaluate a guideline implementation process and identify factors influencing implementation outcome using qualitative data. Methods Seven general practitioners and five radiological personnel from a Norwegian county participated in four focus group interviews in 2019. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, where some categories were predetermined, while most were drawn from the data. Results Four main categories were developed from the data material. 1) Successful/unsuccessful parts of the implementation, 2) perceived changes/lack of changes after the implementation, 3) environment-related factors that affected guideline use, and 4) User related factors that affect guideline use. Conclusions Our findings show that clinical guideline implementation is difficult, despite the implementation strategy being tailored to the target groups. Several environment- and user-related factors contributed to the lack of changes experienced in practice for both general practitioners and radiological personnel.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann Mari Gransjøen
- Department of Health sciences in Gjøvik, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Gjøvik (NTNU), Teknologiveien 22, 2815, Gjøvik, Norway.
| | - Siri Wiig
- SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Kjell Arholmsgate 41, 4036, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Kristin Bakke Lysdahl
- Department of Optometry, Radiography and Lighting Design, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Box 235, 3603, Kongsberg, PO, Norway
| | - Bjørn Morten Hofmann
- Department of Health sciences in Gjøvik, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Gjøvik (NTNU), Teknologiveien 22, 2815, Gjøvik, Norway.,Center for medical ethics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1130, Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Logan GS, Pike A, Copsey B, Parfrey P, Etchegary H, Hall A. What do we really know about the appropriateness of radiation emitting imaging for low back pain in primary and emergency care? A systematic review and meta-analysis of medical record reviews. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0225414. [PMID: 31805073 PMCID: PMC6894771 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225414] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2019] [Accepted: 11/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since 2000, guidelines have been consistent in recommending when diagnostic imaging for low back pain should be obtained to ensure patient safety and reduce unnecessary tests. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the pooled proportion of CT and x-ray imaging of the lumbar spine that were considered appropriate in primary and emergency care. METHODS Pubmed, CINAHL, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Embase were searched for synonyms of "low back pain", "guidelines", and "adherence" that were published after 2000. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were reviewed for inclusion with forward and backward tracking on included studies. Included studies had data extracted and synthesized. Risk of bias was performed on all studies, and GRADE was performed on included studies that provided data on CT and x-ray separately. A random effect, single proportion meta-analysis model was used. RESULTS Six studies were included in the descriptive synthesis, and 5 studies included in the meta-analysis. Five of the 6 studies assessed appropriateness of x-rays; two of the six studies assessed appropriateness of CTs. The pooled estimate for appropriateness of x-rays was 43% (95% CI: 30%, 56%) and the pooled estimate for appropriateness of CTs was 54% (95% CI: 51%, 58%). Studies did not report adequate information to fulfill the RECORD checklist (reporting guidelines for research using observational data). Risk of bias was high in 4 studies, moderate in one, and low in one. GRADE for x-ray appropriateness was low-quality and for CT appropriateness was very-low-quality. CONCLUSION While this study determined a pooled proportion of appropriateness for both x-ray and CT imaging for low back pain, there is limited confidence in these numbers due to the downgrading of the evidence using GRADE. Further research on this topic is needed to inform our understanding of x-ray and CT appropriateness in order to improve healthcare systems and decrease patient harms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Andrea Pike
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University, St. John’s, NL, Canada
| | - Bethan Copsey
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Patrick Parfrey
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John’s, NL, Canada
| | - Holly Etchegary
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John’s, NL, Canada
| | - Amanda Hall
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John’s, NL, Canada
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University, St. John’s, NL, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Flodgren G, O'Brien MA, Parmelli E, Grimshaw JM, Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 6:CD000125. [PMID: 31232458 PMCID: PMC6589938 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd000125.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Clinical practice is not always evidence-based and, therefore, may not optimise patient outcomes. Local opinion leaders (OLs) are individuals perceived as credible and trustworthy, who disseminate and implement best evidence, for instance through informal one-to-one teaching or community outreach education visits. The use of OLs is a promising strategy to bridge evidence-practice gaps. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2011. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of local opinion leaders to improve healthcare professionals' compliance with evidence-based practice and patient outcomes. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trials registers on 3 July 2018, together with searching reference lists of included studies and contacting experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA We considered randomised studies comparing the effects of local opinion leaders, either alone or with a single or more intervention(s) to disseminate evidence-based practice, with no intervention, a single intervention, or the same single or more intervention(s). Eligible studies were those reporting objective measures of professional performance, for example, the percentage of patients being prescribed a specific drug or health outcomes, or both. We included all studies independently of the method used to identify OLs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane procedures in this review. The main comparison was (i) between any intervention involving OLs (OLs alone, OLs with a single or more intervention(s)) versus any comparison intervention (no intervention, a single intervention, or the same single or more intervention(s)). We also made four secondary comparisons: ii) OLs alone versus no intervention, iii) OLs alone versus a single intervention, iv) OLs, with a single or more intervention(s) versus the same single or more intervention(s), and v) OLs with a single or more intervention(s) versus no intervention. MAIN RESULTS We included 24 studies, involving more than 337 hospitals, 350 primary care practices, 3005 healthcare professionals, and 29,167 patients (not all studies reported this information). A majority of studies were from North America, and all were conducted in high-income countries. Eighteen of these studies (21 comparisons, 71 compliance outcomes) contributed to the median adjusted risk difference (RD) for the main comparison. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months (range 2 to 30 months). The results suggested that the OL interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' compliance with evidence-based practice (10.8% absolute improvement in compliance, interquartile range (IQR): 3.5% to 14.6%; moderate-certainty evidence).Results for the secondary comparisons also suggested that OLs probably improve compliance with evidence-based practice (moderate-certainty evidence): i) OLs alone versus no intervention: RD (IQR): 9.15% (-0.3% to 15%); ii) OLs alone versus a single intervention: RD (range): 13.8% (12% to 15.5%); iii) OLs, with a single or more intervention(s) versus the same single or more intervention(s): RD (IQR): 7.1% (-1.4% to 19%); iv) OLs with a single or more intervention(s) versus no intervention: RD (IQR):10.25% (0.6% to 15.75%).It is uncertain if OLs alone, or in combination with other intervention(s), may lead to improved patient outcomes (3 studies; 5 dichotomous outcomes) since the certainty of evidence was very low. For two of the secondary comparisons, the IQR included the possibility of a small negative effect of the OL intervention. Possible explanations for the occasional negative effects are, for example, the possibility that the OLs may have prioritised some outcomes, at the expense of others, or that an unaccounted outcome difference at baseline, may have given a faulty impression of a negative effect of the intervention at follow-up. No study reported on costs or cost-effectiveness.We were unable to determine the comparative effectiveness of different approaches to identifying OLs, as most studies used the sociometric method. Nor could we determine which methods used by OLs to educate their peers were most effective, as the methods were poorly described in most studies. In addition, we could not determine whether OL teams were more effective than single OLs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Local opinion leaders alone, or in combination with other interventions, can be effective in promoting evidence-based practice, but the effectiveness varies both within and between studies.The effect on patient outcomes is uncertain. The costs and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention(s) is unknown. These results are based on heterogeneous studies differing in types of intervention, setting, and outcomes. In most studies, the role and actions of the OL were not clearly described, and we cannot, therefore, comment on strategies to enhance their effectiveness. It is also not clear whether the methods used to identify OLs are important for their effectiveness, or whether the effect differs if education is delivered by single OLs or by multidisciplinary OL teams. Further research may help us to understand how these factors affect the effectiveness of OLs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gerd Flodgren
- Norwegian Institute of Public HealthDivision of Health ServicesMarcus Thranes gate 6OsloNorway0403
| | - Mary Ann O'Brien
- University of TorontoDepartment of Family and Community Medicine500 University AvenueFifth FloorTorontoONCanadaM5G 1V7
| | - Elena Parmelli
- Lazio Regional Health Service ‐ ASL Roma1Department of EpidemiologyRomeItaly
| | - Jeremy M Grimshaw
- Ottawa Hospital Research InstituteClinical Epidemiology ProgramThe Ottawa Hospital ‐ General Campus501 Smyth Road, Box 711OttawaONCanadaK1H 8L6
| | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Hall AM, Scurrey SR, Pike AE, Albury C, Richmond HL, Matthews J, Toomey E, Hayden JA, Etchegary H. Physician-reported barriers to using evidence-based recommendations for low back pain in clinical practice: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Implement Sci 2019; 14:49. [PMID: 31064375 PMCID: PMC6505266 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-019-0884-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2018] [Accepted: 03/27/2019] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adoption of low back pain guidelines is a well-documented problem. Information to guide the development of behaviour change interventions is needed. The review is the first to synthesise the evidence regarding physicians' barriers to providing evidence-based care for LBP using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Using the TDF allowed us to map specific physician-reported barriers to individual guideline recommendations. Therefore, the results can provide direction to future interventions to increase physician compliance with evidence-based care for LBP. METHODS We searched the literature for qualitative studies from inception to July 2018. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility and extracted data on study characteristics, reporting quality, and methodological rigour. Guided by a TDF coding manual, two reviewers independently coded the individual study themes using NVivo. After coding, we assessed confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. RESULTS Fourteen studies (n = 318 physicians) from 9 countries reported barriers to adopting one of the 5 guideline-recommended behaviours regarding in-clinic diagnostic assessments (9 studies, n = 198), advice on activity (7 studies, n = 194), medication prescription (2 studies, n = 39), imaging referrals (11 studies, n = 270), and treatment/specialist referrals (8 studies, n = 193). Imaging behaviour is influenced by (1) social influence-from patients requesting an image or wanting a diagnosis (n = 252, 9 studies), (2) beliefs about consequence-physicians believe that providing a scan will reassure patients (n = 175, 6 studies), and (3) environmental context and resources-physicians report a lack of time to have a conversation with patients about diagnosis and why a scan is not needed (n = 179, 6 studies). Referrals to conservative care is influenced by environmental context and resources-long wait-times or a complete lack of access to adjunct services prevented physicians from referring to these services (n = 82, 5 studies). CONCLUSIONS Physicians face numerous barriers to providing evidence-based LBP care which we have mapped onto 7 TDF domains. Two to five TDF domains are involved in determining physician behaviour, confirming the complexity of this problem. This is important as interventions often target a single domain where multiple domains are involved. Interventions designed to address all the domains involved while considering context-specific factors may prove most successful in increasing guideline adoption. REGISTRATION PROSPERO 2017, CRD42017070703.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda M Hall
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit (PHRU), Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, Room 417
- Janeway Hostel, Health Sciences Centre, 300 Prince Philip Parkway, St. John's, NL, A1B 3V6, Canada.
| | - Samantha R Scurrey
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit (PHRU), Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, Room 417
- Janeway Hostel, Health Sciences Centre, 300 Prince Philip Parkway, St. John's, NL, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Andrea E Pike
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit (PHRU), Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, Room 417
- Janeway Hostel, Health Sciences Centre, 300 Prince Philip Parkway, St. John's, NL, A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Charlotte Albury
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Helen L Richmond
- Centre for Rehabilitation Research in Oxford, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - James Matthews
- School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Elaine Toomey
- School of Psychology, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Jill A Hayden
- Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Holly Etchegary
- Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Ely S, Stynes S, Ogollah R, Foster NE, Konstantinou K. Factors associated with physiotherapists' preference for MRI in primary care patients with low back and leg pain. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2018; 38:46-52. [PMID: 30265991 DOI: 10.1016/j.msksp.2018.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2018] [Revised: 07/20/2018] [Accepted: 09/03/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Criticisms about overuse of MRI in low back pain are well documented. Yet, with the exception of suspicion of serious pathology, little is known about factors that influence clinicians' preference for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at first consultation. OBJECTIVE To explore factors associated with physiotherapists' preference for MRI for patients consulting with benign low back and leg pain (LBLP) including sciatica. DESIGN Cross-sectional cohort study. METHODS Data were collected from 607 primary care LBLP patients participating in the ATLAS cohort study. Following clinical assessment, physiotherapists documented whether he/she wanted the patient to have an MRI. Factors potentially associated with physiotherapists' preference for imaging were selected a priori from patient characteristics and clinical assessment findings. A mixed-effects logistic regression model examined the associations between these factors and physiotherapists' preference for MRI. RESULTS Physiotherapists expressed a preference for MRI in 32% (196/607) of patients, of whom 22 did not have a clinical diagnosis of sciatica (radiculopathy). Factors associated with preference for MRI included; clinical diagnosis of sciatica (OR 4.23: 95% CI 2.29, 7.81), greater than 3 months pain duration (2.61: 1.58, 4.30), high pain intensity (1.24: 1.11, 1.37), patient's low expectation of improvement (2.40: 1.50, 3.83), physiotherapist's confidence in their diagnosis (1.19: 1.07, 1.33), with greater confidence associated with higher probability for MRI preference. CONCLUSION A clinical diagnosis of sciatica and longer symptom duration were most strongly associated with physiotherapists' preference for MRI. Given current best practice guidelines, these appear to be justifiable reasons for MRI preference at first consultation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Ely
- Shrewsbury & Telford Hospitals NHS Trust, Princess Royal Hospital, Apley Castle, Telford, TF1 6TF, UK
| | - Siobhán Stynes
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - Reuben Ogollah
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - Nadine E Foster
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - Kika Konstantinou
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK; Haywood Rheumatology Centre, Haywood Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST6 7AG, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Jenkins HJ, Downie AS, Maher CG, Moloney NA, Magnussen JS, Hancock MJ. Imaging for low back pain: is clinical use consistent with guidelines? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J 2018; 18:2266-2277. [PMID: 29730460 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 80] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2018] [Revised: 04/13/2018] [Accepted: 05/01/2018] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT The problem of imaging patients with low back pain (LBP) when it is not indicated is well recognized. The converse is also possible, although rarely considered. The extent of these two problems is presently unclear. PURPOSE This study aimed to estimate how commonly overuse, and also underuse, of imaging occurs in the management of LBP, and how appropriate use of imaging is assessed. DESIGN This is a systematic review and meta-analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE The sample comprised patients with LBP presenting to primary care. OUTCOME MEASURES Proportions of inappropriate referral, and inappropriate non-referral, for diagnostic imaging for LBP were the outcome measures. METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched from January 1, 1995 to December 17, 2017. Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate, and strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. RESULTS Thirty-three studies were included. In patients referred for lumbar imaging, 34.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27.1, 43.3) were judged inappropriate by the absence of red flags for serious pathology and 31.6% (95% CI: 28.3, 35.1) were judged inappropriate by the criteria of no clinical suspicion of pathology. In patients presenting for care, imaging was inappropriately performed in 27.7% of cases (95% CI: 21.3, 35.1) when judged by duration of episode, 9.0% of cases (95% CI: 7.4, 11.0) when judged by absence of red flags, and 7.0% (95% CI: 1.8, 23.3) when judged by no clinical suspicion of pathology. In patients presenting for care, imaging was not performed where appropriately indicated in 65.6% (95% CI: 51.8, 77.2) of patients who presented with red flags, and 60.8% (95% CI: 42.0, 76.8) with clinical suspicion of serious pathology. CONCLUSIONS Inappropriate imaging is common in LBP management, including both overuse in those where imaging is not indicated and underuse of imaging when it is indicated. Appreciating that both underuse and overuse can occur is fundamental to efforts to improve imaging practice to align with current guidelines and best evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hazel J Jenkins
- Department of Health Professions, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia; Department of Chiropractic, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia.
| | - Aron S Downie
- Department of Chiropractic, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia; The University of Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Chris G Maher
- The University of Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Niamh A Moloney
- Department of Health Professions, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia
| | - John S Magnussen
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia
| | - Mark J Hancock
- Department of Health Professions, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary healthcare: a qualitative study among Ugandan primary care providers using the COM-B framework. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:890. [PMID: 30477492 PMCID: PMC6258411 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3684-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2018] [Accepted: 11/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Uptake of clinical guideline recommendations into routine practice requires changes in attitudes and behaviors of the health care providers. The World Health Organization (WHO) has heavily invested in public health and health promotion globally by developing policy recommendations to guide clinical practice; however, clinical guidelines are often not applied. The success of the implementation of any guidelines depends on consideration of existing barriers and adequately addressing them. Therefore, exploring the context specific barriers and facilitators affecting the primary care providers (PCPs) in Mbarara district, Uganda may provide a practical way of addressing the identified barriers thus influence the PCPs action towards integration of mental healthcare services into PHC. Methods We adopted a theoretical model of behavior change; Capability, Opportunity and Motivation developed to understand behavior (COM-B). This was a cross-sectional study which involved using a semi-structured qualitative interview guide to conduct in-depth interviews with PCP’s (clinical officers, nurses and midwives). Results Capability - inadequacy in knowledge about mental disorders; more comfortable managing patients with a mental problem diagnosis than making a new one; knowledge about mental health was gained during pre-service training; no senior cadre to consultations in mental health; and burdensome to consult the Uganda Clinical Guidelines (UCG). Opportunity - limited supply of hard copies of the UCG; guidelines not practical for local setting; did not regularly deal with clients having mental illness to foster routine usage of the UCG; no sensitization about the UCG to the intended users; and no cues at the health centers to remind the PCPs to use UCG. Motivation - did not feel self-reliant; not seen the UCG at their health facilities; lack of trained mental health specialists; conflicting priorities; and no regulatory measures to encourage screening for mental health. Conclusions Efforts to achieve successful integration of mental health services into PHC need to fit in the context of the implementers; thus the need to adapt the UCG into local context, have cues to enforce implementation, and optimize the available expertize (mental healthcare providers) in the process. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3684-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|
39
|
Gransjøen AM, Wiig S, Lysdahl KB, Hofmann BM. Development and conduction of an active re-implementation of the Norwegian musculoskeletal guidelines. BMC Res Notes 2018; 11:785. [PMID: 30390703 PMCID: PMC6215611 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-018-3894-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2018] [Accepted: 10/27/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Significant geographical variations in the use of diagnostic imaging have been demonstrated in Norway and elsewhere. Non-traumatic musculoskeletal conditions is one area where this has been demonstrated. A national musculoskeletal guideline was implemented in response by online publishing and postal dissemination in Norway in 2014 by national policy makers. The objective of our study was to develop and conduct an intervention as an active re-implementation of this guideline in one Norwegian county to investigate and facilitate guideline adherence. The development and implementation process is reported here, to facilitate understanding of the future evaluation results of this study. Results The consolidated framework for implementation research guided the intervention development and implementation. The implementation development was also based on earlier reported success factors in combination with interviews with general practitioners and radiologists regarding facilitators and barriers to guideline adherence. A combined implementation strategy was developed, including educational meetings, shortening of the guideline and easier access. All the aspects of the implementation strategy were adapted towards general practitioners, radiological personnel and the Norwegian Labor and Welfare Administration. Sixteen educational meetings were held, and six educational videos were made for those unable to attend, or where meetings could not be held. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-018-3894-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann Mari Gransjøen
- Department of Health Sciences in Gjøvik, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Gjøvik (NTNU), Teknologiveien 22, 2815, Gjøvik, Norway.
| | - Siri Wiig
- Faculty of Health Sciences, SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, University of Stavanger, Kjell Arholmsgate 41, 4036, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Kristin Bakke Lysdahl
- Department of Optometry, Radiography and Lighting Design, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, PO Box 235, 3603, Kongsberg, Norway
| | - Bjørn Morten Hofmann
- Department of Health Sciences in Gjøvik, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Gjøvik (NTNU), Teknologiveien 22, 2815, Gjøvik, Norway.,Center for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1130, Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Gransjøen AM, Wiig S, Lysdahl KB, Hofmann BM. Barriers and facilitators for guideline adherence in diagnostic imaging: an explorative study of GPs' and radiologists' perspectives. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:556. [PMID: 30012130 PMCID: PMC6048703 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3372-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2017] [Accepted: 07/09/2018] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Diagnostic imaging has been a part of medicine for the last century. It has been difficult to implement guidelines in this field, and unwarranted imaging has been a frequent problem. Some work has been done to explain these phenomena separately. Identifying the barriers to and facilitators of guideline use has been one strategy. The aim of this study is to offer a more comprehensive explanation of deviations from the guideline by studying the two phenomena together. Methods Eight general practitioners and 10 radiologists from two counties in Norway agreed to semi-structured interviews. Topics covered in the interviews were knowledge of the guideline, barriers to and facilitators of guideline use, implementation of guidelines and factors that influence unwarranted imaging. Results Several barriers to and facilitators of guideline use were identified. Among these are lack of time, pressure from patients, and guidelines being too long, rigid or unclear. Facilitators of guideline use were easy accessibility and having the guidelines adapted to the target group. Some of the factors that influence unwarranted imaging are lack of time, pressure from patients and availability of imaging services. Conclusion There are similarities between the perceived barriers for guideline adherence and the perceived factors that influence unwarranted imaging. There may be a few reasons that explains the deviation from guidelines, and the amount of unwarranted imaging. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3372-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann Mari Gransjøen
- Department of Health sciences in Gjøvik, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Gjøvik (NTNU), Teknologiveien 22, 2815, Gjøvik, Norway.
| | - Siri Wiig
- Faculty of Health Studies, University of Stavanger, Kjell Arholmsgate 41, 4036, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Kristin Bakke Lysdahl
- Faculty of Health Sciences, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 46, 0167, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Optometry, Radiography and Lighting Design, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, PO Box 235, 3603, Kongsberg, Norway
| | - Bjørn Morten Hofmann
- Department of Health sciences in Gjøvik, Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Gjøvik (NTNU), Teknologiveien 22, 2815, Gjøvik, Norway.,Center for medical ethics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1130 Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Liu C, Desai S, Krebs LD, Kirkland SW, Keto‐Lambert D, Rowe BH. Effectiveness of Interventions to Decrease Image Ordering for Low Back Pain Presentations in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review. Acad Emerg Med 2018; 25:614-626. [PMID: 29315969 DOI: 10.1111/acem.13376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2017] [Revised: 11/15/2017] [Accepted: 11/19/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low back pain (LBP) is an extremely frequent reason for patients to present to an emergency department (ED). Despite evidence against the utility of imaging, simple and advanced imaging (i.e., computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance imaging) for patients with LBP has become increasingly frequent in the ED. The objective of this review was to identify and examine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing image ordering in the ED for LBP patients. METHODS A protocol was developed a priori, following the PRISMA guidelines, and registered with PROSPERO. Six bibliographic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and Dissertation Abstracts) and the gray literature were searched. Comparative studies assessing interventions that targeted image ordering in the ED for adult patients with LBP were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened study eligibility and completed data extraction. Study quality was completed independently by two reviewers using the before-after quality assessment checklist, with a third-party mediator resolving any differences. Due to a limited number of studies and significant heterogeneity, only a descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS The search yielded 603 unique citations of which a total of five before-after studies were included. Quality assessment identified potential biases relating to comparability between the pre- and postintervention groups, reliable assessment of outcomes, and an overall lack of information on the intervention (i.e., time point, description, intervention data collection). The type of interventions utilized included clinical decision support tools, clinical practice guidelines, a knowledge translation initiative, and multidisciplinary protocols. Overall, four studies reported a decrease in the relative percentage change in imaging in a specific image modality (22.7%-47.4%) following implementation of the interventions; however, one study reported a 35% increase in patient referrals to radiography, while another study reported a subsequent 15.4% increase in referrals to CT and myelography after implementing an intervention which reduced referrals for simple radiography. DISCUSSION While imaging of LBP has been identified as a key area of imaging overuse (e.g., Choosing Wisely recommendation), evidence on interventions to reduce image ordering for ED patients with LBP is sparse. There is some evidence to suggest that interventions can reduce the use of simple imaging in LBP in the ED; however, a shift in imaging modality has also been demonstrated. Additional studies employing higher-quality methods and measuring intervention fidelity are strongly recommended to further explore the potential of ED-based interventions to reduce image ordering for this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chaocheng Liu
- Department of Emergency Medicine University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
| | - Shashwat Desai
- Department of Emergency Medicine University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
| | - Lynette D. Krebs
- Department of Emergency Medicine University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
| | - Scott W. Kirkland
- Department of Emergency Medicine University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
| | - Diana Keto‐Lambert
- Department of Emergency Medicine University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
| | - Brian H. Rowe
- Department of Emergency Medicine University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Wang KY, Yen CJ, Chen M, Variyam D, Acosta TU, Reed B, Wintermark M, Lincoln CM. Reducing Inappropriate Lumbar Spine MRI for Low Back Pain: Radiology Support, Communication and Alignment Network. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 15:116-122. [PMID: 28969974 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2017] [Revised: 07/26/2017] [Accepted: 08/03/2017] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of educational sessions on reducing lumbar spine MRI inappropriateness for uncomplicated low back pain and to present our institutional experience on the use of ACR's Radiology Support, Communication and Alignment Network (R-SCAN) program toward achieving appropriateness. METHODS The R-SCAN web portal was accessed to register a project. Using order entry data, the number of lumbar spine MRI orders placed per month at three family medicine clinics was assessed over a 10-month period. After educational presentations were given at those three clinics highlighting the American College of Physicians and Choosing Wisely campaign imaging guidelines, the number of MRI orders placed was reassessed over an additional 10 months. For a subset of these exams, the ACR Appropriateness Criteria rating of the lumbar spine MRIs were compared between the pre- and posteducation periods. A P value < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS The average number of monthly MRIs ordered from all three clinics combined was 6.3 during the posteducation period, which was significantly less than during the pre-education period of 10.0 (P = .009). The combined average ACR Appropriateness Criteria rating made at all three clinics was 5.8 after educational sessions, which was significantly higher than the rating of 4.7 before educational sessions (P = .014). CONCLUSION Clinician education, facilitated by R-SCAN, resulted in a reduced number of MRI lumbar spine studies performed for uncomplicated low back pain and improved appropriateness of those studies as measured by the ACR Appropriateness Criteria rating.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Yuqi Wang
- Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
| | | | - Melissa Chen
- Division of Neuroradiology Head and Neck, Department of Radiology, MD Anderson, Houston, Texas
| | - Darshan Variyam
- Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Brian Reed
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Max Wintermark
- Neuroradiology Division, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Suman A, Schaafsma FG, Buchbinder R, van Tulder MW, Anema JR. Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Guideline for Low Back Pain: Process-Evaluation Among Health Care Professionals. JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL REHABILITATION 2017; 27:422-433. [PMID: 27699618 PMCID: PMC5591342 DOI: 10.1007/s10926-016-9673-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
Background To reduce the burden of low back pain (LBP) in the Netherlands, a multidisciplinary guideline for LBP has been implemented in Dutch primary care using a multifaceted implementation strategy targeted at health care professionals (HCPs) and patients. The current paper describes the process evaluation of the implementation among HCPs. Methods The strategy aimed to improve multidisciplinary collaboration and communication, and consisted of 7 components. This process evaluation was performed using the Linnan and Steckler framework. Data were collected using a mixed methods approach of quantitative and qualitative data. Results 128 HCPs participated in the implementation study, of which 96 participated in quantitative and 21 participated in qualitative evaluation. Overall dose delivered for this study was 89 %, and the participants were satisfied with the strategy, mostly with the multidisciplinary approach, which contributed to the mutual understanding of each other's disciplines and perspectives. While the training sessions did not yield any new information, the strategy created awareness of the guideline and its recommendations, contributing to positively changing attitudes and aiding in improving guideline adherent behaviour. However, many barriers to implementation still exist, including personal and practical factors, confidence, dependence and distrust issues among the HCPs, as well as policy factors (e.g. reimbursement systems). Conclusions The data presented in this paper have shown that the strategy that was used to implement the guideline in a Dutch primary care setting was feasible, especially when using a multidisciplinary approach. However, identified barriers for implementation have been identified and should be addressed in future implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnela Suman
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frederieke G. Schaafsma
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Research Centre for Insurance Medicine, Collaboration Between AMC-UMCG-UWV-VUmc, Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7067, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rachelle Buchbinder
- Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute and Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Suite 41, Cabrini Medical Centre, 183 Wattletree Rd, Melbourne, VIC 3144 Australia
| | - Maurits W. van Tulder
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth & Life Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes R. Anema
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Research Centre for Insurance Medicine, Collaboration Between AMC-UMCG-UWV-VUmc, Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7067, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Hodder RK, Wolfenden L, Kamper SJ, Lee H, Williams A, O'Brien KM, Williams CM. Developing implementation science to improve the translation of research to address low back pain: A critical review. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2017; 30:1050-1073. [PMID: 29103549 DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2017.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2017] [Revised: 04/06/2017] [Accepted: 05/31/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
The evidence base regarding treatment for back pain does not align with clinical practice. Currently there is relatively little evidence to guide health decision-makers on how to improve the use, uptake or adoption of evidence-based recommended practice for low back pain. Improving the design, conduct and reporting of strategies to improve the implementation of back pain care will help address this important evidence-practice gap. In this paper, we.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca Kate Hodder
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Centre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, Australia.
| | - Luke Wolfenden
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia
| | - Steven J Kamper
- School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, Australia
| | - Hopin Lee
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Centre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, Australia; Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Amanda Williams
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Centre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, Australia
| | - Kate M O'Brien
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Centre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, Australia
| | - Christopher M Williams
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Centre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Figg-Latham J, Rajendran D. Quiet dissent: The attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of UK osteopaths who reject low back pain guidance - A qualitative study. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2017; 27:97-105. [PMID: 27889288 DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2016.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2016] [Revised: 09/27/2016] [Accepted: 10/17/2016] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Clinical guidelines are derived from best research evidence and aim to: improve quality of non-specific low back pain (nsLBP) management and identify patients at risk of suffering chronic pain. However, guideline discordant attitudes and beliefs have been identified in healthcare students and practitioners, including osteopaths. DESIGN A qualitative approach with elements of grounded theory was used to explore underlying attitudes and beliefs of practitioners/students working in a British osteopathic education institution. All participants rejected guideline recommendations for managing nsLBP. A constant comparative method was used to code and analyse emergent themes from transcript data. SUBJECTS Purposive sampling identified 5 clinic tutors and 7 students; all participated in semi-structured interviews. INTERPRETATION Our central theme was a 'Precedence of Osteopathy' over medicine and other manual therapies. Three subthemes were: 1) beliefs about self; 2) perceptions of others; 3) attitudes to guidelines and research. CONCLUSION Participants possess a strong professional identity fostered by their education. This bestows autonomy, authority and distinctness upon them. The central theme was modelled as a lens through which participants viewed research: the evidence pyramid appears inverted, explaining why participants value expert opinion above all other evidence. Guidelines and research are perceived to threaten professional identity. In contractual situations that oblige practitioners to follow guidelines management, perhaps reflecting a pragmatic response to health-care market forces, clinical practice is modified. Developing further understanding of osteopaths' attitudes and beliefs and behaviour in respect of evidence-based guidance in education is important to enhance the quality of clinical practice in osteopathy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Figg-Latham
- Research Department, European School of Osteopathy, Boxley House, Boxley, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 3DZ, UK.
| | - Dévan Rajendran
- Research Department, European School of Osteopathy, Boxley House, Boxley, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 3DZ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Suman A, Dikkers MF, Schaafsma FG, van Tulder MW, Anema JR. Effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies for the implementation of back and neck pain guidelines in health care: a systematic review. Implement Sci 2016; 11:126. [PMID: 27647000 PMCID: PMC5029102 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-016-0482-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2016] [Accepted: 08/15/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For the optimal use of clinical guidelines in daily practice, mere distribution of guidelines and materials is not enough, and active implementation is needed. This review investigated the effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies compared to minimal, single, or no implementation strategy for the implementation of non-specific low back and/or neck pain guidelines in health care. METHODS The following electronic databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2015: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. The search strategy was restricted to low back pain, neck pain, and implementation research. Studies were included if their design was a randomized controlled trial, reporting on patients (age ≥18 years) with non-specific low back pain or neck pain (with or without radiating pain). Trials were eligible if they reported patient outcomes, measures of healthcare professional behaviour, and/or outcomes on healthcare level. The primary outcome was professional behaviour. Guidelines that were evaluated in the studies had to be implemented in a healthcare setting. No language restrictions were applied, and studies had to be published full-text in peer-reviewed journals, thus excluding abstract only publications, conference abstracts, and dissertation articles. Two researchers independently screened titles and abstract, extracted data from included studies, and performed risk of bias assessments. RESULTS After removal of duplicates, the search resulted in 4750 abstracts to be screened. Of 43 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 12 were included in this review, reporting on 9 individual studies, and separate cost-effectiveness analyses of 3 included studies. Implementation strategies varied between studies. Meta-analyses did not reveal any differences in effect between multifaceted strategies and controls. CONCLUSION This review showed that multifaceted strategies for the implementation of neck and/or back pain guidelines in health care do not significantly improve professional behaviour outcomes. No effects on patient outcomes or cost of care could be found. More research is necessary to determine whether multifaceted implementation strategies are conducted as planned and whether these strategies are effective in changing professional behaviour and thereby clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnela Suman
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University medical centre and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, PO Box 7057, 1007, MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marije F Dikkers
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frederieke G Schaafsma
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University medical centre and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, PO Box 7057, 1007, MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Research Centre for Insurance Medicine, Collaboration between AMC-UMCG-UWV-VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Maurits W van Tulder
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes R Anema
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University medical centre and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, PO Box 7057, 1007, MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Research Centre for Insurance Medicine, Collaboration between AMC-UMCG-UWV-VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Fischer F, Lange K, Klose K, Greiner W, Kraemer A. Barriers and Strategies in Guideline Implementation-A Scoping Review. Healthcare (Basel) 2016; 4:E36. [PMID: 27417624 PMCID: PMC5041037 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare4030036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 529] [Impact Index Per Article: 58.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2016] [Revised: 06/20/2016] [Accepted: 06/24/2016] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Research indicates that clinical guidelines are often not applied. The success of their implementation depends on the consideration of a variety of barriers and the use of adequate strategies to overcome them. Therefore, this scoping review aims to describe and categorize the most important barriers to guideline implementation. Furthermore, it provides an overview of different kinds of suitable strategies that are tailored to overcome these barriers. The search algorithm led to the identification of 1659 articles in PubMed. Overall, 69 articles were included in the data synthesis. The content of these articles was analysed by using a qualitative synthesis approach, to extract the most important information on barriers and strategies. The barriers to guideline implementation can be differentiated into personal factors, guideline-related factors, and external factors. The scoping review revealed the following aspects as central elements of successful strategies for guideline implementation: dissemination, education and training, social interaction, decision support systems and standing orders. Available evidence indicates that a structured implementation can improve adherence to guidelines. Therefore, the barriers to guideline implementation and adherence need to be analysed in advance so that strategies that are tailored to the specific setting and target groups can be developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Fischer
- Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
| | - Kerstin Lange
- Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
| | - Kristina Klose
- Department of Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
| | - Wolfgang Greiner
- Department of Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
| | - Alexander Kraemer
- Department of Public Health Medicine, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Mesner SA, Foster NE, French SD. Implementation interventions to improve the management of non-specific low back pain: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2016; 17:258. [PMID: 27286812 PMCID: PMC4902903 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-1110-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 70] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2015] [Accepted: 06/01/2016] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) are not necessarily translated into practice. Multiple studies have investigated different interventions to implement best evidence into clinical practice yet no synthesis of these studies has been carried out to date. The aim of this study was to systematically review available studies to determine whether implementation interventions in this field have been effective and to identify which strategies have been most successful in changing healthcare practitioner behaviours and improving patient outcomes. METHODS A systematic review was undertaken, searching electronic databases until end of December 2012 plus hand searching, writing to key authors and using prior knowledge of the field to identify papers. Included studies evaluated an implementation intervention to improve the management of NSLBP in clinical practice, measured key outcomes regarding change in practitioner behaviour and/or patient outcomes and subjected their data to statistical analysis. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) recommendations about systematic review conduct were followed. Study inclusion, data extraction and study risk of bias assessments were conducted independently by two review authors. RESULTS Of 7654 potentially eligible citations, 17 papers reporting on 14 studies were included. Risk of bias of included studies was highly variable with 7 of 17 papers rated at high risk. Single intervention or one-off implementation efforts were consistently ineffective in changing clinical practice. Increasing the frequency and duration of implementation interventions led to greater success with those continuously ongoing over time the most successful in improving clinical practice in line with best evidence recommendations. CONCLUSIONS Single intervention or one-off implementation interventions may seem attractive but are largely unsuccessful in effecting meaningful change in clinical practice for NSLBP. Increasing frequency and duration of implementation interventions seems to lead to greater success and the most successful implementation interventions used consistently sustained strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nadine E Foster
- NIHR Musculoskeletal Health in Primary Care, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, England, ST5 5BG
| | - Simon David French
- Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation Professorship in Rehabilitation Therapy, School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Tzortziou Brown V, Underwood M, Mohamed N, Westwood O, Morrissey D, Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. Professional interventions for general practitioners on the management of musculoskeletal conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2016:CD007495. [PMID: 27150167 PMCID: PMC10523188 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd007495.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Musculoskeletal conditions require particular management skills. Identification of interventions which are effective in equipping general practitioners (GPs) with such necessary skills could translate to improved health outcomes for patients and reduced healthcare and societal costs. OBJECTIVES To determine the effectiveness of professional interventions for GPs that aim to improve the management of musculoskeletal conditions in primary care. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2010, Issue 2; MEDLINE, Ovid (1950 - October 2013); EMBASE, Ovid (1980 - Ocotber 2013); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980 - November 2013), and the EPOC Specialised Register. We conducted cited reference searches using ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar; and handsearched selected issues of Arthritis and Rheumatism and Primary Care-Clinics in Office Practice. The latest search was conducted in November 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies of professional interventions for GPs, taking place in a community setting, aiming to improve the management (including diagnosis and treatment) of musculoskeletal conditions and reporting any objective measure of GP behaviour, patient or economic outcomes. We considered professional interventions of any length, duration, intensity and complexity compared with active or inactive controls. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently abstracted all data. We calculated the risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR) of compliance with desired practice for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes. We investigated whether the direction of the targeted behavioural change affects the effectiveness of interventions. MAIN RESULTS Thirty studies met our inclusion criteria.From 11 studies on osteoporosis, meta-analysis of five studies (high-certainty evidence) showed that a combination of a GP alerting system on a patient's increased risk of osteoporosis and a patient-directed intervention (including patient education and a reminder to see their GP) improves GP behaviour with regard to diagnostic bone mineral density (BMD) testing and osteoporosis medication prescribing (RR 4.44; (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.54 to 5.55; 3 studies; 3,386 participants)) for BMD and RR 1.71 (95% CI 1.50 to 1.94; 5 studies; 4,223 participants) for osteoporosis medication. Meta-analysis of two studies showed that GP alerting on its own also probably improves osteoporosis guideline-consistent GP behaviour (RR 4.75 (95% CI 3.62 to 6.24; 3,047 participants)) for BMD and RR 1.52 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.84; 3.047 participants) for osteoporosis medication) and that adding the patient-directed component probably does not lead to a greater effect (RR 0.94 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 2,995 participants)) for BMD and RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.10; 2,995 participants) for osteoporosis medication.Of the 10 studies on low back pain, seven showed that guideline dissemination and educational opportunities for GPs may lead to little or no improvement with regard to guideline-consistent GP behaviour. Two studies showed that the combination of guidelines and GP feedback on the total number of investigations requested may have an effect on GP behaviour and result in a slight reduction in the number of tests, while one of these studies showed that the combination of guidelines and GP reminders attached to radiology reports may result in a small but sustained reduction in the number of investigation requests.Of the four studies on osteoarthritis, one study showed that using educationally influential physicians may result in improvement in guideline-consistent GP behaviour. Another study showed slight improvements in patient outcomes (pain control) after training GPs on pain management.Of three studies on shoulder pain, one study reported that there may be little or no improvement in patient outcomes (functional capacity) after GP education on shoulder pain and injection training.Of two studies on other musculoskeletal conditions, one study on pain management showed that there may be worse patient outcomes (pain control) after GP training on the use of validated assessment scales.The 12 remaining studies across all musculoskeletal conditions showed little or no improvement in GP behaviour and patient outcomes.The direction of the targeted behaviour (i.e. increasing or decreasing a behaviour) does not seem to affect the effectiveness of an intervention. The majority of the studies did not investigate the potential adverse effects of the interventions and only three studies included a cost-effectiveness analysis.Overall, there were important methodological limitations in the body of evidence, with just a third of the studies reporting adequate allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessments. While our confidence in the pooled effect estimate of interventions for improving diagnostic testing and medication prescribing in osteoporosis is high, our confidence in the reported effect estimates in the remaining studies is low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is good-quality evidence that a GP alerting system with or without patient-directed education on osteoporosis improves guideline-consistent GP behaviour, resulting in better diagnosis and treatment rates.Interventions such as GP reminder messages and GP feedback on performance combined with guideline dissemination may lead to small improvements in guideline-consistent GP behaviour with regard to low back pain, while GP education on osteoarthritis pain and the use of educationally influential physicians may lead to slight improvement in patient outcomes and guideline-consistent behaviour respectively. However, further studies are needed to ascertain the effectiveness of such interventions in improving GP behaviour and patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria Tzortziou Brown
- Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry.Centre for Primary Care and Public HealthLondonUK
- Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of LondonCentre for Sports and Exercise Medicine, William Harvey Research Institute,LondonUKE1 4DG
| | - Martin Underwood
- Warwick Medical SchoolWarwick Clinical Trials UnitCoventryWarwickshireUKCV4 7AL
| | | | - Olwyn Westwood
- Warwick Medical School, The University of WarwickGibbet Hall CampusCoventryUKCV4 7AL
| | - Dylan Morrissey
- Queen Mary University of LondonSport and Exercise MedicineLondonUK
- Barts Health NHS TrustPhysiotherapy DepartmentLondonUK
| | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Abdel Shaheed C, McFarlane B, Maher CG, Williams KA, Bergin J, Matthews A, McLachlan AJ. Investigating the Primary Care Management of Low Back Pain: A Simulated Patient Study. THE JOURNAL OF PAIN 2016; 17:27-35. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.09.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2015] [Revised: 09/20/2015] [Accepted: 09/24/2015] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
|