Implementing arthritis clinical practice guidelines in primary care

Guideline-based exercise management for hip and knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional comparison of healthcare professional and patient beliefs in Ireland

OBJECTIVES

To identify within-stakeholder agreement and between-stakeholder differences in beliefs regarding exercise for osteoarthritis among general practitioners (GPs), physiotherapists (PTs) and people with hip and knee osteoarthritis (PwOA). A secondary objective was to explore the association between referral patterns and beliefs of PwOA.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

Online surveys administered to GPs, PTs and PwOA in Ireland via social media and healthcare networks.

PARTICIPANTS

421 valid responses (n=161 GPs, n=163 PTs, n=97 PwOA).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Nine belief statements related to exercise effectiveness, safety and delivery were rated on a 5-point Likert scale and analysed for within-stakeholder consensus. χ2 tests assessed differences in agreement between groups. Multivariable linear regression models tested associations between beliefs in PwOA and referral to/attendance at physiotherapy.

RESULTS

Positive within-stakeholder consensus (>75% agreement) was reached for most statements (7/9 GPs, 6/9 PTs, 5/9 PwOA). However, beliefs of PwOA were significantly less positive compared with healthcare professionals for six statements. All stakeholders disagreed that exercise is effective regardless of the level of pain. Attendance at physiotherapy (49% of PwOA), rather than referral to physiotherapy from a GP only, was associated with positive exercise beliefs for PwOA (β=0.287 (95% CI 0.299 to 1.821)).

CONCLUSIONS

Beliefs about exercise therapy for osteoarthritis are predominantly positive across all stakeholders, although less positive in PwOA. PwOA are more likely to have positive beliefs if they have seen a PT for their osteoarthritis. Knowledge translation should highlight the effectiveness of exercise for all levels of pain and osteoarthritis disease.

Factors influencing the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for osteoarthritis in primary care: A systematic review and thematic synthesis

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of evidence-based health guidelines in primary care is challenging. This systematic review aimed to synthesize qualitative evidence that investigates the factors influencing the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for osteoarthritis in primary care.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative studies. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HMIC, PsychINFO, Web of Science and Assia were searched (from 2000 to March 2019). The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers. Data were analyzed and synthesized using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

1612 articles were screened and four articles with a total of 87 participants (46 patients, 28 GPs, 13 practice nurses) were included. Three of the studies were conducted in England within the context of an implementation trial and one was conducted in the Netherlands. The thematic synthesis revealed three overarching themes. Best practice was not enough to achieve 'buy-in' to implementation but a range of tacit motivators to implementation were identified. Healthcare professionals used patient reasons to justify engaging or not engaging with implementation. Engaging with the whole practice was important in achieving implementation. A disconnect between research and 'real-world' primary care practice influenced long-term implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the relative paucity of current evidence, this systematic review has identified a series of possible disconnects may impact uptake of interventions to improve osteoarthritis care, existing between clinicians and patients, researchers and clinicians, clinicians and guidelines and within general practice itself. There remains a need to further explore the experiences of key stakeholders, including patients involved in implementation for osteoarthritis in primary care.

A Randomized Trial of External Practice Support to Improve Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Primary Care

PURPOSE

We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of adding various forms of enhanced external support to practice facilitation on primary care practices' clinical quality measure (CQM) performance.

METHODS

Primary care practices across Washington, Oregon, and Idaho were eligible if they had fewer than 10 full-time clinicians. Practices were randomized to practice facilitation only, practice facilitation and shared learning, practice facilitation and educational outreach visits, or practice facilitation and both shared learning and educational outreach visits. All practices received up to 15 months of support. The primary outcome was the CQM for blood pressure control. Secondary outcomes were CQMs for appropriate aspirin therapy and smoking screening and cessation. Analyses followed an intention-to-treat approach.

RESULTS

Of 259 practices recruited, 209 agreed to be randomized. Only 42% of those offered educational outreach visits and 27% offered shared learning participated in these enhanced supports. CQM performance improved within each study arm for all 3 cardiovascular disease CQMs. After adjusting for differences between study arms, CQM improvements in the 3 enhanced practice support arms of the study did not differ significantly from those seen in practices that received practice facilitation alone (omnibus P = .40 for blood pressure CQM). Practices randomized to receive both educational outreach visits and shared learning, however, were more likely to achieve a blood pressure performance goal in 70% of patients compared with those randomized to practice facilitation alone (relative risk = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.16-3.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Although we found no significant differences in CQM performance across study arms, the ability of a practice to reach a target level of performance may be enhanced by adding both educational outreach visits and shared learning to practice facilitation.

Australian general practitioner attitudes to clinical practice guidelines and some implications for translating osteoarthritis care into practice

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been shown to improve processes of care and health outcomes, but there is often a discrepancy between recommendations for care and clinical practice. This study sought to explore general practitioner (GP) attitudes towards CPGs, in general and specifically for osteoarthritis (OA), with the implications for translating OA care into practice. A self-administered questionnaire was conducted in January 2013 with a sample of 228 GPs in New South Wales and South Australia. Seventy-nine GPs returned questionnaires (response rate 35%). Nearly all GPs considered that CPGs support decision-making in practice (94%) and medical education (92%). Very few respondents regarded CPGs as a threat to clinical autonomy, and most recognised that individual patient circumstances must be taken into account. Shorter CPG formats were preferred over longer and more comprehensive formats, with preferences being evenly divided among respondents for short, 2-3-page summaries, flowcharts or algorithms and single page checklists. GPs considered accessibility to CPGs to be important, and electronic formats were popular. Familiarity and use of The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners OA Guideline was poor, with most respondents either not aware of it (30%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 27 - 41%), had never used it (19%; 95% CI 12 - 29%) or rarely used it (34%; 95% CI 25-45%). If CPGs are to assist with the translation of evidence into practice, they must be easily accessible and in a format that encourages use.

Study protocol for "Healthy Hearts Northwest": a 2 × 2 randomized factorial trial to build quality improvement capacity in primary care

Background

Little attention has been paid to quality improvement (QI) capacity within smaller primary care practices which comprise nearly half of all primary care settings. Strategies for external support to build such capacity include practice facilitation (PF), shared learning opportunities, and educational outreach. Although PF has proven effectiveness, little is known about the comparative effectiveness of combining these strategies. Here, we describe the protocol of the “Healthy Hearts Northwest” (H2N) study, a randomized trial designed to address these questions while improving risk factors for cardiovascular disease.

Methods/design

The targeted enrollment is 250 smaller primary care practices across Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. The study is utilizing a two-by-two factorial design to assess four different combinations of practice support: PF alone, PF with educational outreach, PF with shared learning opportunities, or PF with both. A mixed methods approach is being used for evaluation and will include data from (1) baseline and follow-up practice and staff surveys; (2) baseline and quarterly clinical performance measurement from each practice on four cardiovascular risk factors: appropriate aspirin use, blood pressure control, lipid management and smoking cessation support; and (3) a quality improvement capacity assessment (QICA) survey used by external practice facilitators to guide improvement efforts.

Discussion

Results from this study will inform future large-scale practice improvement initiatives by providing comparisons of promising external practice support strategies and advance our understanding of how to build QI capacity in primary care.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02839382

Leveraging practice-based research networks to accelerate implementation and diffusion of chronic kidney disease guidelines in primary care practices: a prospective cohort study

Background

Four practice-based research networks (PBRNs) participated in a study to determine whether networks could increase dissemination, implementation, and diffusion of evidence-based treatment guidelines for chronic kidney disease by leveraging early adopter practices.

Methods

Motivated practices from four PBRNs received baseline and periodic performance feedback, academic detailing, and weekly practice facilitation for 6 months during wave I of the study. Each wave I practice then recruited two additional practices (wave II), which received performance feedback and academic detailing and participated in monthly local learning collaboratives led by the wave I clinicians. They received only monthly practice facilitation. The primary outcomes were adherence to primary care-relevant process-of-care recommendations from the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative Guidelines. Performance was determined retrospectively by medical records abstraction. Practice priority, change capacity, and care process content were measured before and after the interventions.

Results

Following the intervention, wave I practices increased the use of ACEIs/ARBs, discontinuation of NSAIDs, testing for anemia, and testing and/or treatment for vitamin D deficiency. Most were able to recruit two additional practices for wave II, and wave II practices also increased their use of ACEIs/ARBs and testing and/or treatment of vitamin D deficiency.

Conclusions

With some assistance, early adopter practices can facilitate the diffusion of evidence-based approaches to other practices. PBRNs are well-positioned to replicate this process for other evidence-based innovations.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0169-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Implementing asthma guidelines using practice facilitation and local learning collaboratives: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Guideline implementation in primary care has proven difficult. Although external assistance through performance feedback, academic detailing, practice facilitation (PF), and learning collaboratives seems to help, the best combination of interventions has not been determined.

METHODS

In a cluster randomized trial, we compared the independent and combined effectiveness of PF and local learning collaboratives (LLCs), combined with performance feedback and academic detailing, with performance feedback and academic detailing alone on implementation of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute's Asthma Guidelines. The study was conducted in 3 primary care practice-based research networks. Medical records of patients with asthma seen during pre- and postintervention periods were abstracted to determine adherence to 6 guideline recommendations. McNemar's test and multivariate modeling were used to evaluate the impact of the interventions.

RESULTS

Across 43 practices, 1,016 patients met inclusion criteria. Overall, adherence to all 6 recommendations increased (P ≤.002). Examination of improvement by study arm in unadjusted analyses showed that practices in the control arm significantly improved adherence to 2 of 6 recommendations, whereas practices in the PF arm improved in 3, practices in the LLCs improved in 4, and practices in the PF + LLC arm improved in 5 of 6 recommendations. In multivariate modeling, PF practices significantly improved assessment of asthma severity (odds ratio [OR] = 2.5, 95% CI, 1.7-3.8) and assessment of asthma level of control (OR = 2.3, 95% CI, 1.5-3.5) compared with control practices. Practices assigned to LLCs did not improve significantly more than control practices for any recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of PF to performance feedback and academic detailing was helpful to practices attempting to improve adherence to asthma guidelines.

Management of early- and late-stage rheumatoid arthritis: are physiotherapy students' intended behaviours consistent with canadian best practice guidelines?

PURPOSE

This study examined whether physiotherapy students in a problem-based learning (PBL) curriculum intend to implement best practices for management of clients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHOD

Physiotherapy students (n=49) completed a subsection of the ACREU Primary Care Survey to evaluate the concordance between intended behaviours and Canadian best practices for early- and late-stage RA, before and after completing the relevant PBL content. Changes in scores were assessed using McNemar's test for dependent proportions.

RESULTS

Most students indicated that they would recommend treatments or referrals for physiotherapy/exercise, education, and occupational therapy or joint protection pre- and post-PBL (>83% and >95%, respectively). Post-PBL, more students recommended referral to a rheumatologist and disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for both early and late RA; however, the increase was significant only for early RA (p=0.013 and 0.031 for referral to rheumatologist and DMARDs, respectively). More students recommended psychosocial support at both stages of RA post-PBL (early RA: p<0.001; late RA: p=0.031). Although more students recommended DMARDs post-PBL, only 8 students in total made this recommendation (16%), and fewer students considered use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Most students (94%) did not recommend referral to a surgeon for early or late RA.

CONCLUSION

Intended behaviour of physiotherapy students was more consistent with Canadian best practice guidelines for managing clients with early- and late-stage RA following the PBL curriculum. Further study is required to determine whether the students were less aware of best practices related to pharmacologic interventions and timely referral to appropriate specialists, or whether they considered these issues to be outside their scope of practice.

Translating Policy into Practice for Community-Based Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Targeting Professional Development Needs among Physiotherapists

Introduction. Contemporary health policy promotes delivery of community-based health services to people with musculoskeletal conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This emphasis requires a skilled workforce to deliver safe, effective care. We aimed to explore physiotherapy workforce readiness to co-manage consumers with RA by determining the RA-specific professional development (PD) needs in relation to work and educational characteristics of physiotherapists in Western Australia (WA). Methods. An e-survey was sent to physiotherapists regarding their confidence in co-managing people with RA and their PD needs. Data including years of clinical experience, current RA clinical caseload, professional qualifications, and primary clinical area of practice were collected. Results. 273 physiotherapists completed the survey. Overall confidence in managing people with RA was low (22.7-58.2%) and need for PD was high (45.1-95.2%). Physiotherapists with greater years of clinical experience, a caseload of consumers with RA, postgraduate qualifications in musculoskeletal physiotherapy, or who worked in the musculoskeletal area were more confident in managing people with RA and less likely to need PD. Online and face-to-face formats were preferred modes of PD delivery. Discussion. To enable community-based RA service delivery to be effectively established, subgroups within the current physiotherapy workforce require upskilling in the evidence-based management of consumers with RA.