Dataset Information

Barriers to implementing the DSM-5 cultural formulation interview: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT: The Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) marked an attempt to apply anthropological concepts within psychiatry. The OCF has been criticized for not providing guidelines to clinicians. The DSM-5 Cultural Issues Subgroup has since converted the OCF into the Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) for use by any clinician with any patient in any clinical setting. This paper presents perceived barriers to CFI implementation in clinical practice reported by patients (n = 32) and clinicians (n = 7) at the New York site within the DSM-5 international field trial. We used an implementation fidelity paradigm to code debriefing interviews after each CFI session through deductive content analysis. The most frequent patient threats were lack of differentiation from other treatments, lack of buy-in, ambiguity of design, over-standardization of the CFI, and severity of illness. The most frequent clinician threats were lack of conceptual relevance between intervention and problem, drift from the format, repetition, severity of patient illness, and lack of clinician buy-in. The Subgroup has revised the CFI based on these barriers for final publication in DSM-5. Our findings expand knowledge on the cultural formulation by reporting the CFI's reception among patients and clinicians.

SUBMITTER: Aggarwal NK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4299818 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers to implementing the DSM-5 cultural formulation interview: a qualitative study.

Aggarwal Neil Krishan NK Nicasio Andel Veronica AV DeSilva Ravi R Boiler Marit M Lewis-Fernández Roberto R

Culture, medicine and psychiatry 20130901 3

The Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) marked an attempt to apply anthropological concepts within psychiatry. The OCF has been criticized for not providing guidelines to clinicians. The DSM-5 Cultural Issues Subgroup has since converted the OCF into the Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) for use by any clinician with any patient in any clinical setting. This paper presents perceived barriers to CFI implem ...[more]

PMID: 23836098

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) is designed to improve understanding of patients' mental health care needs. The lack of empirical evidence on the impact and effectiveness of CFI use in clarifying people's perspectives, experiences, context, and identity, and in preventing cultural misunderstandings between migrant patients and clinicians, inspired this study. The objective is to examine the effect of the CFI on the strength of therapeutic working alliances, and the potential mediating or moderating role of perceived empathy.Materials and methodsA multicenter randomized controlled trial will be conducted, involving migrant patients, their confidants, and clinicians. The CFI will be administered in the intervention group, but not in the control group. Validated questionnaires will be used to assess therapeutic working alliances and perceived empathy. T-tests and linear regression analyses will be conducted to investigate between-group differences and possible mediating or moderating effects.ResultsThis study will indicate whether or not the CFI strengthens the therapeutic working alliance between patients and clinicians, as moderated and/or mediated by perceived empathy.DiscussionResearch on the effect and impact of using the CFI in mental health care for migrant patients is important to clarify whether its use strengthens the therapeutic working alliance with clinicians. This can lead to a reduction in cultural misunderstandings and improve mental health care for migrant patients. The results may also be important for the implementation of the CFI as a standard of care.Ethics and disseminationThis research protocol was tailored to the needs of patients in collaboration with experts by experience. It was approved by the Ethical Review Board of the Tilburg Law School and registered in the Clinical Trials Register under number NCT05788315. Positive results may stimulate further implementation of the CFI in clinical practice, and contribute to improving the impact of the CFI on the therapeutic working alliances.

Project description:BackgroundThe Conversation, Understand, Replace, Experts and evidence-based treatment (CURE) project aims to provide a comprehensive offer of both pharmacotherapy and specialist support for tobacco dependence to all smokers admitted to hospital and after discharge. CURE was recently piloted within a single trust in Greater Manchester, with preliminary evidence suggesting this intervention may be successful in improving patient outcomes. Plans are currently underway to pilot a model based upon CURE in other sites across England. To inform implementation, we conducted a qualitative study, which aimed to identify factors influencing healthcare professionals' implementation behaviour within the pilot site.MethodsIndividual, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 10 purposively sampled health professionals involved in the delivery and implementation of the CURE project pilot. Topic guides were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Transcripts were analysed in line with the framework method, with data coded to TDF domains to highlight important areas of influence and then mapped to the COM-B to support future intervention development.ResultsEight TDF domains were identified as important areas influencing CURE implementation; 'environmental context and resources' (physical opportunity), 'social influence' (social opportunity), 'goals', 'professional role and identity' and 'beliefs about consequences' (reflective motivation), 'reinforcement' (automatic motivation), 'skills' and 'knowledge' (psychological capability). Most domains had the potential to both hinder and/or facilitate implementation, with the exception of 'beliefs about consequences' and 'knowledge', which were highlighted as facilitators of CURE. Participants suggested that 'environmental context and resources' was the most important factor influencing implementation; with barriers most often related to challenges integrating into the wider healthcare context.ConclusionsThis qualitative study identified multi-level barriers and facilitators to CURE implementation. The use of theoretical frameworks allowed for the identification of domains known to influence behaviour change, and thus can be taken forward to develop targeted interventions to support future service implementation. Future work should focus on discussing these findings with a broad range of stakeholders, to ensure resultant intervention strategies are feasible and practicable within a healthcare context. These findings complement wider evaluative work to support nationwide roll out of NHS funded tobacco dependence treatment services in acute care trusts.

Project description:BackgroundAudit and feedback entails systematic documentation of clinical performance based on explicit criteria or standards which is then fed back to professionals in a structured manner. There are potential significant returns on investment from partnerships between existing clinical audit programmes in coordinated programmes of research to test ways of improving the effect of their feedback to drive greater improvements in health care delivery and population outcomes. We explored barriers to and enablers of embedding audit and feedback trials within clinical audit programmes.MethodsWe purposively recruited participants with varied experience in embedded trials in audit programmes. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews, guided by behavioural theory, with researchers, clinical audit programme staff and health care professionals. Recorded interviews were transcribed, and data coded and thematically analysed.ResultsWe interviewed 31 participants (9 feedback researchers, 14 audit staff and 8 healthcare professionals, many having dual roles). We identified barriers and enablers for all 14 theoretical domains but no relationship between domains and participant role. We identified four optimal conditions for sustainable collaboration from the perspectives of stakeholders: resources, that is, recognition that audit programmes need to create capacity to participate in research, and research must be adapted to fit within each programme's constraints; logistics, namely, that partnerships need to address data sharing and audit quality, while securing research funding to ensure operational success; leadership, that is, enthusiastic and engaged audit programme leaders must motivate their team and engage local stakeholders; and relationships, meaning that trust between researchers and audit programmes must be established over time by identifying shared priorities and meeting each partner's needs.ConclusionSuccessfully embedding research within clinical audit programmes is likely to require compromise, logistical expertise, leadership and trusting relationships to overcome perceived risks and fully realise benefits.

Project description:BackgroundBleeding during cardiac surgery is a common complication that often requires the transfusion of blood products. The combination of bleeding and blood product transfusion incrementally increases adverse outcomes including infection and mortality. Following bleeding management guideline recommendations could assist with minimising risk but adherence is not high, and the cause for lack of adherence is not well understood. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to practicing and implementing evidenced-based intra-operative, bleeding management in Australian cardiac surgery units.MethodsWe used a qualitative descriptive design to conduct semi-structured interviews with Australian cardiac surgeons, anaesthetists and perfusionists. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was utilised to guide interviews and thematically analyse the data. Categorised data were then linked with the three key domains of the COM-B model (capability, opportunity, motivation - behaviour) to explore and understand behaviour.ResultsSeventeen interviews were completed. Nine of the 14 TDF domains emerged as significant. Analysis revealed key themes to improving capability included, standardisation, monitoring, auditing and feedback of data and cross discipline training. Opportunity for change was improved with interpersonal and interdepartmental collaboration through shared goals, and more efficient and supportive processes allowing clinicians to navigate unfamiliar business and financial models of health care. Results suggest as individuals, clinicians had the motivation to make change and healthcare organisations have an obligation and a responsibility to partner with clinicians to support change and improve goal directed best practice.ConclusionUsing a theory-based approach it was possible to identify factors which may be positively or negatively influence clinicians ability to implement best practice bleeding management in Australian cardiac surgical units.

Dataset Information

Barriers to implementing the DSM-5 cultural formulation interview: a qualitative study.

Publications

Barriers to implementing the DSM-5 cultural formulation interview: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets