首页> 外文期刊>Implementation Science >Identifying determinants of care for tailoring implementation in chronic diseases: an evaluation of different methods
【24h】

Identifying determinants of care for tailoring implementation in chronic diseases: an evaluation of different methods

机译:确定适应慢性病实施的护理决定因素:不同方法的评估

获取原文
       

摘要

Background The tailoring of implementation interventions includes the identification of the determinants of, or barriers to, healthcare practice. Different methods for identifying determinants have been used in implementation projects, but which methods are most appropriate to use is unknown. Methods The study was undertaken in five European countries, recommendations for a different chronic condition being addressed in each country: Germany (polypharmacy in multimorbid patients); the Netherlands (cardiovascular risk management); Norway (depression in the elderly); Poland (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—COPD); and the United Kingdom (UK) (obesity). Using samples of professionals and patients in each country, three methods were compared directly: brainstorming amongst health professionals, interviews of health professionals, and interviews of patients. The additional value of discussion structured through reference to a checklist of determinants in addition to brainstorming, and determinants identified by open questions in a questionnaire survey, were investigated separately. The questionnaire, which included closed questions derived from a checklist of determinants, was administered to samples of health professionals in each country. Determinants were classified according to whether it was likely that they would inform the design of an implementation intervention (defined as plausibly important determinants). Results A total of 601 determinants judged to be plausibly important were identified. An additional 609 determinants were judged to be unlikely to inform an implementation intervention, and were classified as not plausibly important. Brainstorming identified 194 of the plausibly important determinants, health professional interviews 152, patient interviews 63, and open questions 48. Structured group discussion identified 144 plausibly important determinants in addition to those already identified by brainstorming. Conclusions Systematic methods can lead to the identification of large numbers of determinants. Tailoring will usually include a process to decide, from all the determinants that are identified, those to be addressed by implementation interventions. There is no best buy of methods to identify determinants, and a combination should be used, depending on the topic and setting. Brainstorming is a simple, low cost method that could be relevant to many tailored implementation projects.
机译:背景实施干预措施的定制包括确定医疗保健实践的决定因素或障碍。实施项目中已经使用了不同的方法来确定决定因素,但是哪种方法最适合使用尚不清楚。方法该研究在五个欧洲国家进行,每个国家针对不同的慢性病提出了建议:德国(多病患者的多药店);荷兰(心血管风险管理);挪威(老年人抑郁症);波兰(慢性阻塞性肺疾病— COPD);和英国(肥胖症)。使用每个国家的专业人员和患者样本,直接比较了三种方法:卫生专业人员之间的头脑风暴,卫生专业人员的访谈和患者的访谈。分别研究了除集思广益外,还通过参考行列式检查清单和通过问卷中未解决问题确定的行列式确定的讨论的附加价值。该调查表包括来自决定因素清单的封闭式问题,已向每个国家的卫生专业人员进行了抽样调查。行列式根据是否有可能告知实施干预的设计进行分类(定义为可能重要的行列式)。结果共鉴定了601个被认为重要的决定因素。另有609个决定因素被认为不太可能告知实施干预措施,并且被归类为不重要。集体讨论确定了194个可能重要的决定因素,卫生专业人员访谈152,患者访谈63和公开问题48。结构化小组讨论确定了144个可能重要的决定因素,以及已经由集体讨论确定的因素。结论系统的方法可以导致大量决定因素的鉴定。裁缝通常将包括一个过程,该过程将从所有确定的决定因素中确定实施干预措施要解决的决定因素。找不到决定因素的最佳方法,应根据主题和设置使用组合。头脑风暴法是一种简单,低成本的方法,可能与许多量身定制的实施项目有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号