Implementing absolute cardiovascular disease risk assessment into pathology collection services.
blood pressure
cholesterol
prevention
Journal
Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
ISSN: 1365-2753
Titre abrégé: J Eval Clin Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9609066
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Jun 2024
03 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
15
03
2024
accepted:
16
05
2024
medline:
3
6
2024
pubmed:
3
6
2024
entrez:
3
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Pathology services represent an ideal setting to integrate absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimation when patients attend for routine cholesterol testing. This study aimed to explore the process of implementing CVD risk estimation into point-of-care service delivery by pathology staff to inform future implementation and sustainability. A new service for CVD risk estimation via a self-directed screening station was implemented into 14 pathology service sites across Tasmania, Australia. Before implementation, observations at pathology services (n = 26) and semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 26 pathology staff (88% female, 77% aged 41-60 years) to identify factors that could impact implementation of the service. The process of implementation was then evaluated using participant observations and clinical trial recruitment data. Transcripts and field notes were analysed thematically according to the Medical Research Council Framework and used to develop a programme logic model to understand how the service could be adapted to be successfully integrated into routine workflow at pathology services. Eight key themes were identified during the pre-implementation phase as important factors that could impact upon integration of CVD risk estimation into pathology services. Themes related to factors within the organisation, including available resources, logistics and workflow, as well as having sufficient time to complete the intervention. Additional factors related to the individual motivations of staff, collaborative leadership and patient characteristics. Success of implementation varied among sites, requiring the trialling of different strategies to support uptake of the service and patient recruitment. Implementing CVD risk estimation into point-of-care pathology services required an understanding of the core implementation components specific to each context, and for implementation strategies to be targeted to the individual and organisational contexts. The generated programme logic model may be useful in guiding future implementation endeavours within these services and aiding the selection of apt implementation strategies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04896021, registered 19/05/2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04896021.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pathology services represent an ideal setting to integrate absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimation when patients attend for routine cholesterol testing. This study aimed to explore the process of implementing CVD risk estimation into point-of-care service delivery by pathology staff to inform future implementation and sustainability.
METHODS
METHODS
A new service for CVD risk estimation via a self-directed screening station was implemented into 14 pathology service sites across Tasmania, Australia. Before implementation, observations at pathology services (n = 26) and semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 26 pathology staff (88% female, 77% aged 41-60 years) to identify factors that could impact implementation of the service. The process of implementation was then evaluated using participant observations and clinical trial recruitment data. Transcripts and field notes were analysed thematically according to the Medical Research Council Framework and used to develop a programme logic model to understand how the service could be adapted to be successfully integrated into routine workflow at pathology services.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Eight key themes were identified during the pre-implementation phase as important factors that could impact upon integration of CVD risk estimation into pathology services. Themes related to factors within the organisation, including available resources, logistics and workflow, as well as having sufficient time to complete the intervention. Additional factors related to the individual motivations of staff, collaborative leadership and patient characteristics. Success of implementation varied among sites, requiring the trialling of different strategies to support uptake of the service and patient recruitment.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Implementing CVD risk estimation into point-of-care pathology services required an understanding of the core implementation components specific to each context, and for implementation strategies to be targeted to the individual and organisational contexts. The generated programme logic model may be useful in guiding future implementation endeavours within these services and aiding the selection of apt implementation strategies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04896021, registered 19/05/2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04896021.
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04896021']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : National Health and Medical Research Council
Organisme : National Heart Foundation of Australia
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Abubakar I, Tillmann T, Banerjee A. Global, regional, and national age‐sex specific all‐cause and cause‐specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. The Lancet. 2015;385(9963):117‐171.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health‐care expenditure on cardiovascular diseases 2008–09. AIHW; 2014.
National vascular disease prevention alliance. Guidelines for the management of absolute cardiovascular disease risk. 2012.
Commonwealth of Australia as represented by the Department of Health and Aged Care. Australian Guideline for assessing and managing cardiovascular disease risk. 2023.
Kim G, Anita S, Jason A, Kuhan K, Tony S, Rosemary K. Cross‐sectional survey describing general practitioners’ absolute cardiovascular disease risk assessment practices and their relationship to knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about cardiovascular disease risk in Queensland, Australia. BMJ Open. 2020;10(8):e033859.
Tuzzio L, O'Meara ES, Holden E, et al. Barriers to implementing cardiovascular risk calculation in primary care: alignment with the consolidated framework for implementation research. Am J Prev Med. 2021;60(2):250‐257.
Vagholkar S, Zwar N, Jayasinghe UW, et al. Influence of cardiovascular absolute risk assessment on prescribing of antihypertensive and lipid‐lowering medications: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Am Heart J. 2014;167(1):28‐35.
Imms A, Quinn S, Nelson M. General practitioners’ use of cardiovascular risk calculators. Aust Fam Physician. 2010;39(1/2):57‐60.
Bonner C, Fajardo MA, Doust J, McCaffery K, Trevena L. Implementing cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines to translate evidence‐based medicine and shared decision making into general practice: theory‐based intervention development, qualitative piloting and quantitative feasibility. Implement Sci. 2019;14(1):86.
Morgan S, Henderson KM, Tapley A, et al. Pathology test‐ordering behaviour of Australian general practice trainees: a cross‐sectional analysis. Int J Qual Health Care. 2015;27(6):528‐535.
Darker CD, Nicolson GH, Carroll A, Barry JM. The barriers and facilitators to the implementation of national clinical programmes in Ireland: using the MRC framework for process evaluations. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):733.
Kellogg WK. Foundation. Logic model development guide. WK Kellogg Foundation; 2004.
Smith JD, Li DH, Rafferty MR. The implementation research logic model: a method for planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects. Implementation. Science. 2020;15(1):84.
Pinnock H, Epiphaniou E, Taylor SJC. Phase IV implementation studies. The forgotten finale to the complex intervention methodology framework. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014;11(suppl ment 2):S118‐S122.
Hassan S, Heinkel S, Burton A, et al. A qualitative study exploring the barriers and facilitators of implementing a cardiovascular disease risk reducing intervention for people with severe mental illness into primary care contexts across England: the ‘PRIMROSE'trial. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):753.
Okop K, Delobelle P, Lambert EV, et al. Implementing and evaluating community health worker‐led cardiovascular disease risk screening intervention in sub‐Saharan Africa communities: a participatory implementation research protocol. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;20(1):298.
Suran M. Increased use of medicare telehealth during the pandemic. JAMA. 2022;327(4):313.
Fisher K, Davey AR, Magin P. Telehealth for Australian general practice: The present and the future. Aust J Gen Pract. 2022;51:626‐629.
Phillippi J, Lauderdale J. A guide to field notes for qualitative research: context and conversation. Qual Health Res. 2018;28(3):381‐388.
Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.
Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Marconi VC. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: how many interviews are enough? Qual Health Res. 2017;27(4):591‐608.
Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. J Posit Psychol. 2017;12(3):297‐298.
Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. Encyclopaedia of quality of life research. In: Michalos AC editor Springer; 2013.
Adams P. Exploring social constructivism: Theories and practicalities. Education 3‐13. 2006;34(3):243‐257. Education.
Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications; 2017.
Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med. 2010;8(1):63.
Damschroder LJ, Reardon CM, Sperber N, Robinson CH, Fickel JJ, Oddone EZ. Implementation evaluation of the telephone lifestyle coaching (TLC) program: organizational factors associated with successful implementation. Transl Behav Med. 2017;7(2):233‐241.
Dennis S, Reddel HK, Middleton S, et al. Barriers and outcomes of an evidence‐based approach to diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Australia: a qualitative study. Fam Pract. 2017;34(4):485‐490.
Pagano L, McKeough Z, Wootton SL, et al. Acceptability and barriers of a GP–physiotherapist partnership in the diagnosis and management of COPD in primary care: a qualitative study. Health Expect. 2024;27:e13935.doi:10.1111/hex.13935
Moore L, Britten N, Lydahl D, Naldemirci Ö, Elam M, Wolf A. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of person‐centred care in different healthcare contexts. Scand J Caring Sci. 2017;31(4):662‐673.
Rapp CA, Etzel‐Wise D, Marty D, et al. Evidence‐based practice implementation strategies: results of a qualitative study. Community Ment Health J. 2008;44(3):213‐224.
Carlfjord S, Lindberg M, Bendtsen P, Nilsen P, Andersson A. Key factors influencing adoption of an innovation in primary health care: a qualitative study based on implementation theory. BMC Fam Pract. 2010;11(1):60.
Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Fernández ME, Abadie B, Damschroder LJ. Choosing implementation strategies to address contextual barriers: diversity in recommendations and future directions. Implement Sci. 2019;14(1):42.
Lewis CC, Klasnja P, Powell BJ, et al. From classification to causality: advancing understanding of mechanisms of change in implementation science. Front Public Health. 2018;6:136.
Fixsen DL, Blase KA, Naoom SF, Wallace F. Core implementation components. Res Soc Work Pract. 2009;19(5):531‐540.
Ogden T. Core and variation components. In: Braithwaite J, editor., Implementation science: The key concepts. Taylor & Francis; 2022:93‐95. Rapport F C‐WR.
Orsetta C, Abendschein M, Luu N, Soldani E, Soriolo C. The post‐COVID‐19 rise in labour shortages. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1721. OECD Publishing; 2022. [cited 2023 Nov 16] Available from: https://www.oecd.org/publications/the-post-covid-19-rise-in-labour-shortages-e60c2d1c-en.html
Vines E, Storen R. Health workforce. In: Policy S editor. [Internet] Parliament of Australia; 2022 [cited 2023 Nov 16] Available from: https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook47p/HealthWorkforce
Humphrey N, Lendrum A, Ashworth E, Frearson K, Buck R, Kerr K Implementation and process evaluation (IPE) for interventions in education settings: An introductory handbook: Education Endowment Foundation; 2016.