Dataset Information

Factors hindering the adherence to clinical practice guideline for diabetes mellitus in the Palestinian primary healthcare clinics: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Despite a high number of the internationally produced and implemented clinical guidelines, the adherence with them is still low in healthcare. This study aimed at exploring the perspectives and experiences of senior doctors and nurses towards the barriers of adherence to diabetes guideline.

Setting

The Palestinian Primary Health Care-Ministry of Health (PHC-MoH) and Primary Health Care-United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (PHC- UNRWA) in Gaza Strip.

Participants

Individual face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted with 20 senior doctors and nurses who were purposefully selected.

Methods

Qualitative design was employed using the theoretical framework by Cabana et al to develop an interview guide. Semi-structural and audio-recorded interviews were conducted. Data were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

Results

The key theme barriers identified by participants that emerged from the analysed data were in regard of the PHC-MoH lack reimbursement, lack of resources and lack of the guideline trustworthiness, and in regard of PHC-UNRWA the time constraints and the lack of the guideline trustworthiness. The two key subthemes elicited from the qualitative analysis were the outdated guideline and lack of auditing and feedback.

Conclusion

The analysis identified a wide range of barriers against the adherence to diabetes guideline within the PHC-MoH and PHC-UNRWA. The environmental-related and guideline-related barriers were the most prominent factors influencing the guideline adherence. Our study can inform the policy makers and senior managers to develop a tailored interventions that can target the elicited barriers through a multifaceted implementation strategy.

SUBMITTER: Radwan M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6129048 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Factors hindering the adherence to clinical practice guideline for diabetes mellitus in the Palestinian primary healthcare clinics: a qualitative study.

Radwan Mahmoud M Akbari Sari Ali A Rashidian Arash A Takian Amirhossein A Elsous Aymen A Abou-Dagga Sanaa S

BMJ open 20180905 9

<h4>Objective</h4>Despite a high number of the internationally produced and implemented clinical guidelines, the adherence with them is still low in healthcare. This study aimed at exploring the perspectives and experiences of senior doctors and nurses towards the barriers of adherence to diabetes guideline.<h4>Setting</h4>The Palestinian Primary Health Care-Ministry of Health (PHC-MoH) and Primary Health Care-United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (PHC- U ...[more]

PMID: 30185569

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe burden of cancer is large in Australia, and rates of cancer Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) adherence is suboptimal across various cancers.MethodsThe objective of this study is to characterise clinician-perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer CPG adherence in Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data from 33 oncology-focused clinicians (surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and haematologists). Clinicians were recruited in 2019 and 2020 through purposive and snowball sampling from 7 hospitals across Sydney, Australia, and interviewed either face-to-face in hospitals or by phone. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, and qualitative thematic analysis of the interview data was undertaken. Human research ethics committee approval and governance approval was granted (2019/ETH11722, #52019568810127).ResultsFive broad themes and subthemes of key barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment CPG adherence were identified: Theme 1: CPG content; Theme 2: Individual clinician and patient factors; Theme 3: Access to, awareness of and availability of CPGs; Theme 4: Organisational and cultural factors; and Theme 5: Development and implementation factors. The most frequently reported barriers to adherence were CPGs not catering for patient complexities, being slow to be updated, patient treatment preferences, geographical challenges for patients who travel large distances to access cancer services and limited funding of CPG recommended drugs. The most frequently reported facilitators to adherence were easy accessibility, peer review, multidisciplinary engagement or MDT attendance, and transparent CPG development by trusted, multidisciplinary experts. CPGs provide a reassuring framework for clinicians to check their treatment plans against. Clinicians want cancer CPGs to be frequently updated utilising a wiki-like process, and easily accessible online via a comprehensive database, coordinated by a well-trusted development body.ConclusionFuture implementation strategies of cancer CPGs in Australia should be tailored to consider these context-specific barriers and facilitators, taking into account both the content of CPGs and the communication of that content. The establishment of a centralised, comprehensive, online database, with living wiki-style cancer CPGs, coordinated by a well-funded development body, along with incorporation of recommendations into point-of-care decision support would potentially address many of the issues identified.

Project description:BackgroundSustainability of adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) represents an important indicator of the successful implementation in the primary care setting.AimTo explore the sustainability of primary care providers' adherence to CPGs after receiving planned guideline implementation strategies, activities, or programmes.MethodsCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); EMBase; Joanna Briggs Institute; Journals@Ovid; Medline; PsycoINFO; PubMed, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through May 2021 to identify relevant studies. Studies evaluating the sustainability of primary care providers' (PCPs') adherence to CPGs in primary care after any planned guideline implementation strategies, activities, or programmes were included. Two reviewers extracted data from the included studies and assessed methodological quality independently. Narrative synthesis of the findings was conducted.ResultsEleven studies were included. These studies evaluated the sustainability of adherence to CPGs related to drug prescribing, disease management, cancer screening, and hand hygiene in primary care. Educational outreach visits, teaching sessions, reminders, audit and feedback, and printed materials were utilized in the included studies as guideline implementation strategies. None of the included studies utilized purpose-designed measurements to evaluate the extent of sustainability. Three studies showed positive sustainability results, three studies showed mixed sustainability results, and four studies reported no significant changes in the sustainability of adherence to CPGs. Overall, it was difficult to quantify the extent to which CPG-based healthcare behaviours were fully sustained based on the variety of results reported in the included studies.ConclusionCurrent guideline implementation strategies may potentially improve the sustainability of PCPs' adherence to CPGs. However, the literature reveals a limited body of evidence for any given guideline implementation strategy. Further research, including the development of a validated purpose-designed sustainability tool, is required to address this important clinical issue.Trial registrationThe study protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (No. CRD42021259748 ).

Project description:BackgroundThough much is known about the benefits attributed to medical scribes documenting patient visits (e.g., reducing documentation time for the provider, increasing patient-care time, expanding the roles of licensed and non-licensed personnel), little attention has been paid to how care workers enact scribing as a part of their existing practice. The purpose of this study was to perform an ethnographic process evaluation of an innovative medical scribing practice with primary care teams in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) clinics across the United States. The aim of our study was to understand barriers and facilitators to implementing a scribing practice in primary care.MethodsAt three to six months after medical scribing was introduced, we used semi-structured interviews and direct observations during site visits to five sites to describe the intervention, understand if the intervention was implemented as planned, and to record the experience of the teams who implemented the intervention. This manuscript only reports on semi-structured interview data collected from providers and scribes. Initial matrix analysis based on categories outlined in the evaluation plan informed subsequent deductive coding using the social-shaping theory Normalization Process Theory.ResultsThrough illustrating the slow accumulation of interactions and knowledge that fostered cautious momentum of teams working to normalize scribing practice in VHA primary care clinics, we show how the practice had 1) an organizing effect, as it centered a shared goal (the creation of the note) between the provider, scribe, and patient, and 2) a generative effect, as it facilitated care workers developing relationships that were both interpersonally and inter-professionally valuable. Based on our findings, we suggest that a scribing practice emphasizes the complementarity of existing professional roles, which thus leverage the interactional possibilities already present in the primary care team. Scribing, as a skill, forged moments of interprofessional fit. Scribing, in practice, created opportunities for interpersonal connection.ConclusionsOur research suggests that individuals will notice different benefits to scribing based on their professional expectations and organizational roles related to documenting patient visits.

Project description:IntroductionMost studies have reported barriers to guideline usage mainly from doctors' perspective; few have reported the perspective of other stakeholders. This study aimed to determine the views and barriers to adherence of a national clinical practice guideline (CPG) on management of hypertension from the perspectives of policymakers, doctors and allied healthcare professionals.MethodsThis study used a qualitative approach with purposive sampling. Seven in depth interviews and six focus group discussions were conducted with 35 healthcare professionals (policy makers, doctors, pharmacists and nurses) at a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, between February and June 2013. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and checked. Thematic approach was used to analyse the data.ResultsTwo main themes and three sub-themes emerged from this study. The main themes were (1) variation in the use of CPG and (2) barriers to adherence to CPG. The three sub-themes for barriers were issues inherent to the CPG, systems and policy that is not supportive of CPG use, and attitudes and behaviour of stakeholders. The main users of the CPG were the primary care doctors. Pharmacists only partially use the guidelines, while nurses and policy makers were not using the CPG at all. Participants had suggested few strategies to improve usage and adherence to CPG. First, update the CPG regularly and keep its content simple with specific sections for allied health workers. Second, use technology to facilitate CPG accessibility and provide protected time for implementation of CPG recommendations. Third, incorporate local CPG in professional training, link CPG adherence to key performance indicators and provide incentives for its use.ConclusionsBarriers to the use of CPG hypertension management span across all stakeholders. The development and implementation of CPG focused mainly on doctors with lack of involvement of other healthcare stakeholders. Guidelines should be made simple, current, reliable, accessible, inclusive of all stakeholders and with good policy support.

Project description:ObjectivesSelecting effective implementation strategies to support guideline-concordant dental care is a complex process. For this research project, an online deliberative forum brought together staff from dental clinics to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of implementation strategies and barriers to implementation of a component of a dental (pit-and-fissure) guideline. The goal was to determine whether deliberative engagement enabled participants' sharing of promotive and prohibitive voice about implementation strategies to promote guideline-concordant care.DesignQualitative analysis of online chat transcripts of facilitated deliberations from 31 small group sessions.SettingKaiser Permanente Dental (KP Dental) in the USA.ParticipantsAll staff from 16 dental offices.ResultsThe directed content analysis revealed that participants shared prohibitive and promotive voice when offering critique of the barriers and the implementation strategies suggested by the researchers. The analysis also revealed that the focus of the deliberations often was not on the aspect of the pit-and-fissure guideline intended by the research team for deliberation.ConclusionsThe deliberative forum discussions were a productive venue to ask staff in dental clinics to share their perspectives on strategies to promote guideline-concordant care as well as barriers. Participants demonstrated prohibitive voice and engaged critically with the materials the research team had put together. An important limitation of the deliberation was that the discussion often centred around an aspect of the pit-and-fissure guideline that already was implemented well. To ensure a deliberation oriented towards resolving challenging aspects of the pit-and-fissure guideline, greater familiarity with the guideline would have been important, as well as more intimate knowledge of the current discrepancies in guideline-concordant care.Trial registration numberThis project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT04682730. The trial was first registered on 18 December 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730.

Project description:BackgroundNeonatal intensive care units are high-risk settings where medication errors can occur and cause harm to this fragile segment of patients. This multicenter qualitative study was conducted to describe medication errors that occurred in neonatal intensive care units in Palestine from the perspectives of healthcare providers.MethodsThis exploratory multicenter qualitative study was conducted and reported in adherence to the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research checklist. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (4 pediatricians/neonatologists and 11 intensive care unit nurses) who provided care services for patients admitted to neonatal intensive care units in Palestine. An interview schedule guided the semi-structured in-depth interviews. The qualitative interpretive description approach was used to thematically analyze the data.ResultsThe total duration of the interviews was 282 min. The healthcare providers described their experiences with 41 different medication errors. These medication errors were categorized under 3 categories and 10 subcategories. Errors that occurred while preparing/diluting/storing medications were related to calculations, using a wrong solvent/diluent, dilution errors, failure to adhere to guidelines while preparing the medication, failure to adhere to storage/packaging guidelines, and failure to adhere to labeling guidelines. Errors that occurred while prescribing/administering medications were related to inappropriate medication for the neonate, using a different administration technique from the one that was intended, and administering a different dose from the one that was intended. Errors that occurred after administering the medications were related to failure to adhere to monitoring guidelines.ConclusionIn this multicenter study, pediatricians/neonatologists and neonatal intensive care unit nurses described medication errors occurring in intensive care units in Palestine. Medication errors occurred in different stages of the medication process: preparation/dilution/storage, prescription/administration, and monitoring. Further studies are still needed to quantify medication errors occurring in the neonatal intensive care units and investigate if the designed strategies could be effective in minimizing the medication errors.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the BTS-SIGN asthma guideline is one of the most well known and widely respected guidelines in the world, implementation in UK primary care remains patchy. Building on extensive earlier descriptive work, we sought to explore the way teamwork and inter-professional relationships impact on the implementation of the BTS-SIGN guideline on asthma in general practice.MethodsQualitative comparative case study using nine in-depth interviews and 2 focus groups with general practitioners and practice nurses, involved in delivering asthma care. Participants were purposively recruited from practices in a Scottish health board with high and low compliance with the BTS-SIGN asthma guideline.ResultsThere was a marked difference in the way respondents from practices with high compliance and respondents from practices with low compliance spoke about the value of guidelines and the challenges of implementing them. On both accounts, the former were more positive than the latter and were able to be more specific about the strategies they used to overcome barriers to implementation. We explored the reason for this difference in response and identified practice organisation, centring on delegation of work to nurses, as a factor mediating the practice's level of compliance. Effective delegation was underpinned by organisation of asthma work among practice members who have the appropriate level of skills and knowledge, know and understand each others' work and responsibilities, communicate well among themselves and trust each others' skills. It was the combination of these factors which made for successful delegation and guideline implementation, not any one factor in isolation.ConclusionIn our sample of practices, teamwork and organisation of care within practices appeared to impact on guideline implementation and further larger studies are needed to explore this issue further. Isolated interventions such as measures to improve staff's knowledge or increased clinical resource and time, which are currently being considered, are unlikely to be effective unless practices are supported in developing their teams in a way which supports the deployment of these resources.

Dataset Information

Factors hindering the adherence to clinical practice guideline for diabetes mellitus in the Palestinian primary healthcare clinics: a qualitative study.

Objective

Setting

Participants

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Factors hindering the adherence to clinical practice guideline for diabetes mellitus in the Palestinian primary healthcare clinics: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets