Dataset Information

Implementing a theory-based intradialytic exercise programme in practice: a quality improvement project.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Research evidence outlines the benefits of intradialytic exercise (IDE), yet implementation into practice has been slow, ostensibly due to a lack of patient and staff engagement. The aim of this quality improvement project was to improve patient outcomes via the introduction of an IDE programme, evaluate patient uptake and sustainability and enhance the engagement of routine haemodialysis (HD) staff with the delivery of the IDE programme.

Methods

We developed and refined an IDE programme, including interventions designed to increase patient and staff engagement that were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), using a series of 'Plan, Do, Study, Act' (PDSA) cycles. The programme was introduced at two UK National Health Service HD units. Process measures included patient uptake, withdrawals, adherence and HD staff involvement. Outcome measures were patient-reported functional capacity, anxiety, depression and symptomology. All measures were collected over 12?months.

Results

A total of 95 patients were enrolled in the IDE programme; 64 (75%) were still participating at 3?months, decreasing to 41 (48%) at 12?months. Adherence was high (78%) at 3?months, decreasing to 63% by 12?months. The provision of IDE by HD staff accounted for a mean of 2 (5%) sessions per 3-month time point. Patients displayed significant improvements in functional ability (P?=?0.01) and a reduction in depression (P?=?0.02) over 12?months, but the effects seen were limited to those who completed the programme.

Conclusions

A theory-based IDE programme is feasible and leads to improvement in functional capacity and depression. Sustaining IDE over time is complicated by high levels of patient withdrawal from the programme. Significant change at an organizational level is required to enhance sustainability by increasing HD staff engagement or access to professional exercise support.

SUBMITTER: Young HML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6275440 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of older people reach the end of life in care homes. The aim of this study is to explore the perceived benefits of, and barriers to, implementation of the Gold Standards Framework for Care Homes (GSFCH), a quality improvement programme in palliative care.MethodsNine care homes involved in the GSFCH took part. We conducted semi-structured interviews with nine care home managers, eight nurses, nine care assistants, eleven residents and seven of their family members. We used the Framework approach to qualitative analysis. The analysis was deductive based on the key tasks of the GSFCH, the 7Cs: communication, coordination, control of symptoms, continuity, continued learning, carer support, and care of the dying. This enabled us to consider benefits of, and barriers to, individual components of the programme, as well as of the programme as a whole.ResultsPerceived benefits of the GSFCH included: improved symptom control and team communication; finding helpful external support and expertise; increasing staff confidence; fostering residents' choice; and boosting the reputation of the home. Perceived barriers included: increased paperwork; lack of knowledge and understanding of end of life care; costs; and gaining the cooperation of GPs. Many of the tools and tasks in the GSFCH focus on improving communication. Participants described effective communication within the homes, and with external providers such as general practitioners and specialists in palliative care. However, many had experienced problems with general practitioners. Although staff described the benefits of supportive care registers, coding predicted stage of illness and advance care planning, which included improved communication, some felt the need for more experience of using these, and there were concerns about discussing death.ConclusionsMost of the barriers described by participants are relevant to other interventions to improve end of life care in care homes. There is a need to investigate the impact of quality improvement programmes in care homes, such as the GSFCH, on a wider range of outcomes for residents and their families, and to monitor the sustainability of any resulting improvements. It is also important to explore the impact of the different components of these complex interventions.

Project description:BackgroundGuideline adherence in physical therapy is far from optimal, which has consequences for the effectiveness and efficiency of physical therapy care. Programmes to enhance guideline adherence have, so far, been relatively ineffective. We systematically developed a theory-based Quality Improvement in Physical Therapy (QUIP) programme aimed at the individual performance level (practicing physiotherapists; PTs) and the practice organization level (practice quality manager; PQM). The aim of the study was to pilot test the multilevel QUIP programme's effectiveness and the fidelity, acceptability and feasibility of its implementation.MethodsA one-group, pre-test, post-test pilot study (N?=?8 practices; N?=?32 PTs, 8 of whom were also PQMs) done between September and December 2009. Guideline adherence was measured using clinical vignettes that addressed 12 quality indicators reflecting the guidelines' main recommendations. Determinants of adherence were measured using quantitative methods (questionnaires). Delivery of the programme and management changes were assessed using qualitative methods (observations, group interviews, and document analyses). Changes in adherence and determinants were tested in the paired samples T-tests and expressed in effect sizes (Cohen's d).ResultsOverall adherence did not change (3.1%; p?=?.138). Adherence to three quality indicators improved (8%, 24%, 43%; .000 ? p ? .023). Adherence to one quality indicator decreased (-15.7%; p?=?.004). Scores on various determinants of individual performance improved and favourable changes at practice organizational level were observed. Improvements were associated with the programme's multilevel approach, collective goal setting, and the application of self-regulation; unfavourable findings with programme deficits. The one-group pre-test post-test design limits the internal validity of the study, the self-selected sample its external validity.ConclusionsThe QUIP programme has the potential to change physical therapy practice but needs considerable revision to induce the ongoing quality improvement process that is required to optimize overall guideline adherence. To assess its value, the programme needs to be tested in a randomized controlled trial.

Project description:BackgroundAcute coronary syndromes, including myocardial infarction and unstable angina, are important causes of premature mortality, morbidity and hospital admissions. Acute coronary syndromes consume large amounts of health care resources, and have a major negative economic and social impact through days lost at work, support for disability, and coping with the psychological consequences of illness. Several registries have shown that evidence based treatments are under-utilised in this patient population, particularly in high-risk patients. There is evidence that systematic educational programmes can lead to improvement in the management of these patients. Since application of the results of important clinical trials and expert clinical guidelines into clinical practice leads to improved patient care and outcomes, we propose to test a quality improvement programme in a general group of hospitals in Europe.Methods/designThis will be a multi-centre cluster-randomised study in 5 European countries: France, Spain, Poland, Italy and the UK. Thirty eight hospitals will be randomised to receive a quality improvement programme or no quality improvement programme. Centres will enter data for all eligible non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients admitted to their hospital for a period of approximately 10 months onto the study database and the sample size is estimated at 2,000-4,000 patients. The primary outcome is a composite of eight measures to assess aggregate potential for improvement in the management and treatment of this patient population (risk stratification, early coronary angiography, anticoagulation, beta-blockers, statins, ACE-inhibitors, clopidogrel as a loading dose and at discharge). After the quality improvement programme, each of the eight measures will be compared between the two groups, correcting for cluster effect.DiscussionIf we can demonstrate important improvements in the quality of patient care as a result of a quality improvement programme, this could lead to a greater acceptance that such programmes should be incorporated into routine health training for health professionals and hospital managers.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00716430.