Development of a patient-centred electronic review template to support self-management in primary care: a mixed-methods study.

asthma general practice primary health care self-management

Journal

BJGP open
ISSN: 2398-3795
Titre abrégé: BJGP Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101713531

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2023
Historique:
received: 15 11 2022
revised: 05 01 2023
accepted: 15 01 2023
medline: 4 3 2023
pubmed: 4 3 2023
entrez: 3 3 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Electronic templates are frequently used in long-term condition (LTC) reviews (for example, asthma) to act as reminders and improve documentation; however, they can restrict patient-centred care and opportunities for patients to discuss concerns and self-management. The IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP This was a mixed-methods study, which integrated qualitative and systematic review data, primary care Professional Advisory Group feedback, and qualitative data from clinician interviews. Aligned with the Medical Research Council complex intervention framework, a template was developed in the following three phases: (1) development phase, which consisted of a qualitative exploration with clinicians and patients, a systematic review, and prototype template development; (2) feasibility pilot phase, which involved feedback from clinicians ( Template development was guided by the preliminary qualitative work and the systematic review. A prototype template was developed with an opening question to establish patient agendas, and a closing prompt to confirm agendas have been addressed and an asthma action plan provided. The feasibility pilot identified refinements needed, including focusing the opening question on asthma. Pre-piloting ensured integration with the IMP Following the multi-stage development process, the implementation strategy, including the asthma review template, is now being tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Electronic templates are frequently used in long-term condition (LTC) reviews (for example, asthma) to act as reminders and improve documentation; however, they can restrict patient-centred care and opportunities for patients to discuss concerns and self-management.
AIM OBJECTIVE
The IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP
DESIGN & SETTING METHODS
This was a mixed-methods study, which integrated qualitative and systematic review data, primary care Professional Advisory Group feedback, and qualitative data from clinician interviews.
METHOD METHODS
Aligned with the Medical Research Council complex intervention framework, a template was developed in the following three phases: (1) development phase, which consisted of a qualitative exploration with clinicians and patients, a systematic review, and prototype template development; (2) feasibility pilot phase, which involved feedback from clinicians (
RESULTS RESULTS
Template development was guided by the preliminary qualitative work and the systematic review. A prototype template was developed with an opening question to establish patient agendas, and a closing prompt to confirm agendas have been addressed and an asthma action plan provided. The feasibility pilot identified refinements needed, including focusing the opening question on asthma. Pre-piloting ensured integration with the IMP
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Following the multi-stage development process, the implementation strategy, including the asthma review template, is now being tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36868789
pii: BJGPO.2022.0165
doi: 10.3399/BJGPO.2022.0165
pmc: PMC10354399
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023, The Authors.

Références

Br J Gen Pract. 2011 Oct;61(591):e666-73
pubmed: 22152849
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004 Jan;113(1):59-65
pubmed: 14713908
BMJ. 1990 Sep 29;301(6753):651-3
pubmed: 1977482
BMC Fam Pract. 2013 Jul 21;14:103
pubmed: 23870537
BMJ Open. 2020 Apr 8;10(4):e033516
pubmed: 32273313
BMC Med. 2017 Mar 17;15(1):64
pubmed: 28302126
Br J Gen Pract. 2021 Aug 26;71(710):e652-e659
pubmed: 33690148
Lancet. 2016 Jul 16;388(10041):268-74
pubmed: 27207746
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 15;9(8):e029954
pubmed: 31420394
BMJ. 2017 Mar 6;356:i6795
pubmed: 28264797
BMJ. 2021 Sep 30;374:n2061
pubmed: 34593508
Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Jul;68(672):e495-e504
pubmed: 29784866
BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Oct 14;11:272
pubmed: 21999234
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2017 Jul 18;27(1):45
pubmed: 28720751

Auteurs

Kirstie McClatchey (K)

Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Edinburgh, UK kirstie.mcclatchey@ed.ac.uk.

Aimee Sheldon (A)

Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.

Liz Steed (L)

Institute for Population Health Sciences, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University, London, UK.

Jessica Sheringham (J)

Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.

Francis Appiagyei (F)

Optimum Patient Care, Cambridge, UK.

David Price (D)

Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Centre of Academic Primary Care, Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Vicky Hammersley (V)

Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.

Stephanie Taylor (S)

Institute for Population Health Sciences, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University, London, UK.

Hilary Pinnock (H)

Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.

Classifications MeSH