Dataset Information

Facilitators and barriers for performing comprehensive medication reviews and follow-up by multiprofessional teams in older hospitalised patients.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:There is a lack of knowledge about factors that influence the performance of comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) by multiprofessional teams in hospital practice. This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients from the healthcare professional perspective. METHODS:Physicians and ward-based pharmacists were recruited from an ongoing trial at four hospitals in Sweden. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 physicians and 7 pharmacists. Interview topics were working processes, resources, competences, medication-related problems, intervention effects and collaboration. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Identified subthemes were categorised as facilitators or barriers and grouped into overarching main themes. RESULTS:In total, 21 facilitators and 25 barriers were identified across all CFIR domains and grouped in 6 main themes: (a) CMRs and follow-up are needed, but not in all patients; (b) there is a general belief in positive effects; (c) lack of resources is an issue, although the performance of CMRs may save time; (d) pharmacists' knowledge and skills are valuable, but they need more clinical competence; (e) compatibility with hospital practice is challenging, and roles and responsibilities are unclear and (f) personal contact at the ward is essential for physician-pharmacist collaboration. CONCLUSION:Multiple facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients exist. These factors should be addressed in future initiatives with similar interventions by multiprofessional teams to ensure successful implementation and performance in hospital practice.

SUBMITTER: Kempen TGH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7239809 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Facilitators and barriers for performing comprehensive medication reviews and follow-up by multiprofessional teams in older hospitalised patients.

Kempen Thomas Gerardus Hendrik TGH Kälvemark Amanda A Sawires Maria M Stewart Derek D Gillespie Ulrika U

European journal of clinical pharmacology 20200219 6

<h4>Purpose</h4>There is a lack of knowledge about factors that influence the performance of comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) by multiprofessional teams in hospital practice. This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients from the healthcare professional perspective.<h4>Methods</h4>Physicians and ward-based pharmacists were recruited from an ongoing trial at four hospitals in Sweden. Semi-structured ...[more]

PMID: 32076745

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe integration of mental health and social services for people diagnosed with severe mental illness (SMI) has been a key aspect of attempts to reform mental health services in the UK and aims to minimise user and carer distress and confusion arising from service discontinuities. Community mental health teams (CMHTs) are a key component of UK policy for integrated service delivery, but implementing this policy has raised considerable organisational challenges. The aim of this study was to identify and explore facilitators and barriers perceived to influence continuity of care by health and social care professionals working in and closely associated with CMHTs.MethodsThis study employed a survey design utilising in-depth, semi-structured interviews with a proportionate, random sample of 113 health and social care professionals and representatives of voluntary organisations. Participants worked in two NHS Mental Health Trusts in greater London within eight adult CMHTs and their associated acute in-patient wards, six local general practices, and two voluntary organisations.ResultsTeam leadership, decision making, and experiences of teamwork support were facilitators for cross boundary and team continuity; face-to-face communication between teams, managers, general practitioners, and the voluntary sector were facilitators for information continuity. Relational, personal, and longitudinal continuity were facilitated in some local areas by workforce stability. Barriers for cross boundary and team continuity were specific leadership styles and models of decision making, blurred professional role boundaries, generic working, and lack of training for role development. Barriers for relational, personal, and longitudinal continuity were created by inadequate staffing levels, high caseloads, and administrative duties that could limit time spent with users. Incompatibility of information technology systems hindered information continuity. Flexible continuity was challenged by the increasingly complex needs of service users.ConclusionsSubstantive challenges exist in harnessing the benefits of integrated CMHT working to deliver continuity of care. Team support should be prioritised in terms of IT provision linked to a review of current models of administrative support. Investment in education and training for role development, leadership, workforce retention, and skills to meet service users' complex needs are recommended.

Project description:BackgroundKnowing what facilitates and hinders physical activity behaviour across domains (leisure, travel, work or education, and household) is central for the development of actions for more active lifestyles. Thus, the aim of this systematic review of reviews was to summarize the evidence on barriers and facilitators of domain-specific physical activity.MethodsWe included systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis that investigated the association between modifiable barriers and facilitators and levels of domain-specific physical activity. Reviews published until September 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, Regional Library of Medicine (BIREME), and PsycNET, and from the reference list of selected articles. Each review was screened by two independent reviewers for eligibility. Data extracted from selected papers included methodological aspects (number of primary studies, study designs, and age groups); physical activity domains and barriers and facilitators investigated; and direction of association. For each pair of barrier/facilitator and domain-specific physical activity, we recorded the number of positive, negative, and null associations reported across reviews. Quality assessment of each systematic review was performed using the AMSTAR-2 tool.ResultsForty-four systematic reviews were selected. The evidence base was largest for leisure-time followed by travel-related physical activity. A very small number of reviews included physical activity in work, educational and domestic settings. Across all physical activity domains, factors related to the built environment were more abundant in the reviews than intra and interpersonal factors. Very consistent positive associations were observed between a range of intrapersonal factors and leisure-time physical activity, as well as moderately consistent evidence of positive association for general social support and support from family members. Evidence of moderate consistency was found for the positive association between transport-related physical activity and positive beliefs about consequences, walkability, and existence of facilities that support active travel. Evidence on barriers and facilitators for physical activity at work, educational, and domestic settings was limited in volume and consistency.ConclusionsEfforts and resources are required to diversify and strength the evidence base on barriers and facilitators of domain-specific physical activity, as it is still limited and biased towards the leisure domain and built environment factors.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020209710.

Project description:BackgroundPsychological safety is the concept by which individuals feel comfortable expressing themselves in a work environment, without fear of embarrassment or criticism from others. Psychological safety in healthcare is associated with improved patient safety outcomes, enhanced physician engagement and fostering a creative learning environment. Therefore, it is important to establish the key levers which can act as facilitators or barriers to establishing psychological safety. Existing literature on psychological safety in healthcare teams has focused on secondary care, primarily from an individual profession perspective. In light of the increased focus on multidisciplinary work in primary care and the need for team-based studies, given that psychological safety is a team-based construct, this study sought to investigate the facilitators and barriers to psychological safety in primary care multidisciplinary teams.MethodsA mono-method qualitative research design was chosen for this study. Healthcare professionals from four primary care teams (n = 20) were recruited using snowball sampling. Data collection was through semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to generate findings.ResultsThree meta themes surfaced: shared beliefs, facilitators and barriers to psychological safety. The shared beliefs offered insights into the teams' background functioning, providing important context to the facilitators and barriers of psychological safety specific to each team. Four barriers to psychological safety were identified: hierarchy, perceived lack of knowledge, personality and authoritarian leadership. Eight facilitators surfaced: leader and leader inclusiveness, open culture, vocal personality, support in silos, boundary spanner, chairing meetings, strong interpersonal relationships and small groups.ConclusionThis study emphasises that factors influencing psychological safety can be individualistic, team-based or organisational. Although previous literature has largely focused on the role of leaders in promoting psychological safety, safe environments can be created by all team members. Members can facilitate psychological safety in instances where positive leadership behaviours are lacking - for example, strengthening interpersonal relationships, finding support in silos or rotating the chairperson in team meetings. It is anticipated that these findings will encourage practices to reflect on their team dynamics and adopt strategies to ensure every member's voice is heard.

Project description:BackgroundHealth policy-makers must often make decisions in compressed time frames and with limited resources. Hence, rapid reviews have become a pragmatic alternative to comprehensive systematic reviews. However, it is important that rapid review methods remain rigorous to support good policy development and decisions. There is currently little evidence about which streamlined steps in a rapid review are less likely to introduce unacceptable levels of uncertainty while still producing a product that remains useful to policy-makers.MethodsThis paper summarizes current research describing commonly used methods and practices that are used to conduct rapid reviews and presents key considerations and options to guide methodological choices for a rapid review.ResultsThe most important step for a rapid review is for an experienced research team to have early and ongoing engagement with the people who have requested the review. A clear research protocol, derived from a needs assessment conducted with the requester, serves to focus the review, defines the scope of the rapid review, and guides all subsequent steps. Common recommendations for rapid review methods include tailoring the literature search in terms of databases, dates, and languages. Researchers can consider using a staged search to locate high-quality systematic reviews and then subsequently published primary studies. The approaches used for study screening and selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment should be tailored to the topic, researcher experience, and available resources. Many rapid reviews use a single reviewer for study selection, risk-of-bias assessment, or data abstraction, sometimes with partial or full verification by a second reviewer. Rapid reviews usually use a descriptive synthesis method rather than quantitative meta-analysis. Use of brief report templates and standardized production methods helps to speed final report publication.ConclusionsResearchers conducting rapid reviews need to make transparent methodological choices, informed by stakeholder input, to ensure that rapid reviews meet their intended purpose. Transparency is critical because it is unclear how or how much streamlined methods can bias the conclusions of reviews. There are not yet internationally accepted standards for conducting or reporting rapid reviews. Thus, this article proposes interim guidance for researchers who are increasingly employing these methods.

Project description:BackgroundPregnancy causes physiological changes to the maternal organ systems that can be regarded as a cardiometabolic stress test for women. Preeclampsia, a pregnancy complication characterized by new onset of hypertension in combination with proteinuria or end-organ dysfunction, affects approximately 2-8% of pregnancies. Adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preeclampsia, have been described as a failed stress test and have been consistently linked with increased risk of cardiovascular disease later in life. The postpartum period is therefore often regarded as a window of opportunity for cardiovascular disease prevention. However, we lack knowledge about how women with preeclampsia experience current postpartum care in the Norwegian health system. The aim of this qualitative study is to uncover women's perspectives and preferences regarding postpartum follow-up.MethodsSemi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 17 women following a six-month lifestyle intervention study. Participants were 9-20 months postpartum, following a pregnancy complicated by preeclampsia. Data were analyzed using Malterud's systematic text condensation.ResultsWe identified five themes, each with 2-3 subthemes, that demonstrate how women with recent preeclampsia experience postpartum follow-up: (1) fear and uncertainty (a body out of balance and facing an uncertain future), (2) a conversation on lifestyle - not really that difficult (preeclampsia as a gateway, a respectful approach, and a desire for more constructive feedback), (3) when your own health is not a priority (a new everyday life, out of focus, and lack of support), (4) motivation for lifestyle changes (an eye opener, lack of intrinsic motivation, and a helping hand), and (5) lack of structured and organized follow-up (there should be a proper system, a one-sided follow-up care, and individual variation in follow-up care).ConclusionsFindings from this study highlight the need for more systematic postpartum follow-up for women after a pregnancy complicated by preeclampsia. Further research is required to explore the potential use of standardized guidelines and routine invitations to postpartum care. Furthermore, exploring health care professionals' experiences is crucial to ensure their engagement in postpartum care after complicated pregnancies.

Dataset Information

Facilitators and barriers for performing comprehensive medication reviews and follow-up by multiprofessional teams in older hospitalised patients.

Publications

Facilitators and barriers for performing comprehensive medication reviews and follow-up by multiprofessional teams in older hospitalised patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets