Nationwide implementation of personalized outcomes forecasts to support physical therapists in treating patients with intermittent claudication: Protocol for an interrupted time series study

Evaluation of the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication: a multimethods process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Personalised outcomes forecasts (POFs) were introduced among physical and exercise therapists in the Netherlands to optimise supervised exercise therapy for patients with intermittent claudication. Yet, therapists' initial adoption and sustainable implementation of POFs can be influenced by various factors.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine therapists' adoption of the POFs, their fidelity to the measurement protocol for supervised exercise therapy, and their perceived barriers and facilitators for using POFs in practice.

METHODS

A multimethod process evaluation was conducted, including quantitative descriptive and pre-post approaches, as well as a qualitative framework approach. To examine adoption, we evaluated the proportion of therapists who expressed interest in POFs by completing one of three provided e-learnings and the proportion of therapists who started using POFs in practice. To examine fidelity to the measurement protocol, we compared the per-episode proportion of follow-up measurements documented by therapists preimplementation and postimplementation. Qualitative data on barriers and facilitators were identified through semistructured interviews with therapists.

RESULTS

One year after the implementation, 89% of therapists eligible to use POFs (n=1727) completed at least one e-learning and 51% of therapists started using POFs. The per-episode proportion of documented follow-up measurements per therapist increased, from a mean rate of 37% (3 months) and 22% (6 months) during the preimplementation period to a mean rate of 53% (3 months) and 32% (6 months) during the postimplementation period (p<0.001). Among interviewed therapists (n=12), identified barriers included competing demands and a lack of skills or confidence. Identified facilitators included the potential to improve the quality of care and a positive user attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that although there is initial interest in and adoption of POFs, addressing barriers and leveraging facilitators through tailored implementation strategies could further increase their utilisation in practice.

Evaluating the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication in the Netherlands: a multimethods study

BACKGROUND

To support the optimisation of supervised exercise therapy (SET) in patients with intermittent claudication, we developed personalised outcomes forecasts (POFs), which visualise estimated walking distance and quality of life for individual patients. The POFs may enable healthcare professionals, such as physical and exercise therapists, to improve shared decision-making and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess differences in patient outcomes (functional walking distance, maximal walking distance and health-related quality of life) and the level of shared decision-making before and after the implementation of POFs in the conservative treatment of patients with intermittent claudication.

METHODS

An interrupted time series design was used to compare preimplementation and postimplementation differences on patient outcomes. Using routinely collected data, differences from baseline to 6 months were compared between patients before and patients after the implementation. To compare levels of shared decision-making, we conducted observations of initial consults within a sample of physical or exercise therapists both before and after the implementation. Audiorecords of observations were scored on shared decision-making using the OPTION-5 instrument.

RESULTS

Differences in improvements between patients with whom POFs were discussed (n=317) and patients before the implementation of POFs (n=721) did not reach statistical significance for both functional walking distance (experimental vs. control=+23%, p=0.11) and maximal walking distance (experimental vs. control=+21%, p=0.08). For health-related quality of life, the POFs-informed patients showed a statistically significant greater improvement of 4% (p=0.04). Increased levels of shared decision-making were observed in postimplementation consults (n=20) when compared with preimplementation consults (n=36), as the median OPTION-5 total score showed a statistically significant increase from 45 to 55 points (p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating POFs into daily practice of SET for patients with intermittent claudication could assist in improving health-related quality of life and enhancing patient involvement. Using POFs did not result in statistically significant different improvements between groups on walking distances.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL8838.