Dataset Information

Implementation of national antenatal hypertension guidelines: a multicentre multiple methods study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the implementation of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence antenatal hypertension guidelines, to identify strategies to reduce incidences of severe hypertension and associated maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality in pregnant women with chronic hypertension. METHODS:We used a multiple method multisite approach to establish implementation of guidelines and the associated barriers and facilitators. We used a national survey of healthcare professionals (n=97), case notes review (n=55) and structured observations (n=42) to assess implementation. The barriers and facilitators to implementation were identified from semistructured qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals (n=13) and pregnant women (n=18) using inductive thematic analysis. The findings were integrated and evaluated using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:Pregnant women with chronic hypertension and their principal carers (obstetricians, midwives and physicians), at three National Health Service hospital trusts with different models of care. RESULTS:We found severe hypertension to be prevalent (46% of case notes reviewed) and target blood pressure practices to be suboptimal (56% of women had an antenatal blood pressure target documented). Women were infrequently given information (52%) or offered choice (19%) regarding antihypertensives. Women (14/18) reported internal conflict in taking antihypertensives and non-adherence was prevalent (8/18). Women who were concordant with treatment recommendations described having mutual trust with professionals mediated through appropriate information, side effect management and involvement in decision making. Professionals reported needing updates and tools for target blood pressure setting and shared decision making underpinned by antihypertensive safety and effectiveness research. CONCLUSIONS:Women's non-adherence to antihypertensives is higher than anticipated. Suboptimal information provision around treatment, choice of antihypertensives and target setting practices by healthcare professionals may be contributory. Understanding the reasons for non-adherence will inform education and decision-making strategies needed to address both clinician and women's behaviour. Further research into the effectiveness and long-term safety of common antihypertensives is also required.

SUBMITTER: Whybrow R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7590365 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of national antenatal hypertension guidelines: a multicentre multiple methods study.

Whybrow Rebecca R Webster Louise L Girling Joanna J Brown Heather H Wilson Hannah H Sandall Jane J Chappell Lucy L

BMJ open 20201023 10

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the implementation of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence antenatal hypertension guidelines, to identify strategies to reduce incidences of severe hypertension and associated maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality in pregnant women with chronic hypertension.<h4>Methods</h4>We used a multiple method multisite approach to establish implementation of guidelines and the associated barriers and facilitators. We used a national survey of healthcare p ...[more]

PMID: 33099489

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOne of the challenges to implementing clinical practice guidelines is the need to adapt guidelines to the local context and identify barriers to their uptake. Several models of framework are available to consider for use in guideline adaptation.MethodsWe completed a multiphase study to explore the implementation of maternal health guidelines in Kosovo, focusing on determinants of uptake and methods to contextualize for local use. The study involved a survey, individual interviews, focus groups, and a consensus meeting with relevant stakeholders, including clinicians (obstetricians, midwives), managers, researchers, and policy makers from the national Ministry of Health and the World Health Organization office in Pristina, Kosovo.ResultsParticipants identified several important barriers to implementation. First, lack of communication between clinicians and ministry representatives was seen as leading to duplication of effort in creating or adapting guidelines, as well as substantial mistrust between clinicians and policy makers. Second, there was a lack of communication across clinical groups that provide obstetric care and a lack of integration across the entire healthcare system, including rural and urban centers. This fragmentation was thought to have directly resulted from the war in 1998 - 1999. Third, the conflict substantially and adversely affected the healthcare infrastructure in Kosovo, which has resulted in an inability to monitor quality of care across the country. Furthermore, the impact on infrastructure has affected the ability to access required medications consistently and to smoothly transfer patients from rural to urban centers. Another issue raised during this project was the appropriateness of including guideline recommendations perceived to be 'aspirational'.ConclusionsImplementing clinical practice guidelines in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) requires consideration of several specific barriers. Particularly pertinent to this study were the effects of recent conflict and the resulting fragmentation of healthcare and communication strategies among relevant stakeholders. However, as Kosovo rebuilds and invests in infrastructure after the conflict, there is a tremendous opportunity to create comprehensive, thoughtful strategies to monitor and improve quality of care. To avoid duplication of effort, it may be beneficial for LMICs to share information on assessing barriers as well as on guideline implementation strategies.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Many treatment decisions are preference-sensitive and call for shared decision-making, notably when benefits are limited or uncertain, and harms impact quality of life. We explored if clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) acknowledge preference-sensitive decisions in how they motivate and phrase their recommendations. DESIGN:We performed a qualitative analysis of the content of CPGs and verified the results in semistructured interviews with CPG panel members. SETTING:Dutch oncology CPGs issued in 2010 or later, concerning primary treatment with curative intent. PARTICIPANTS:14 CPG panel members. MAIN OUTCOMES:For treatment recommendations from six CPG modules, two researchers extracted the following: strength of recommendation in terms of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and its consistency with the CPG text; completeness of presentation of benefits and harms; incorporation of patient preferences; statements on the panel's benefits-harm trade-off underlying recommendation; and advice on patient involvement in decision-making. RESULTS:We identified 32 recommendations, 18 were acknowledged preference-sensitive decisions. Three of 14 strong recommendations should have been weak based on the module text. The reporting of benefits and harms, and their probabilities, was sufficiently complete and clear to inform the strength of the recommendation in one of the six modules only. Numerical probabilities were seldom presented. None of the modules presented information on patient preferences. CPG panel's preferences were not made explicit, but appeared to have impacted 15 of 32 recommendations. Advice to involve patients and their preferences in decision-making was given for 20 recommendations (14 weak). Interviewees confirmed these findings. Explanations for lack of information were, for example, that clinicians know the information and that CPGs must be short. Explanations for trade-offs made were cultural-historical preferences, compliance with daily care, presumed role of CPGs and lack of time. CONCLUSIONS:The motivation and phrasing of CPG recommendations do not stimulate choice awareness and a neutral presentation of options, thus hindering shared decision-making.

Project description:Improving quality in children's mental health and social service settings will require implementation strategies capable of moving effective treatments and other innovations (e.g., assessment tools) into routine care. It is likely that efforts to identify, develop, and refine implementation strategies will be more successful if they are informed by relevant stakeholders and are responsive to the strengths and limitations of the contexts and implementation processes identified in usual care settings. This study will describe: the types of implementation strategies used; how organizational leaders make decisions about what to implement and how to approach the implementation process; organizational stakeholders' perceptions of different implementation strategies; and the potential influence of organizational culture and climate on implementation strategy selection, implementation decision-making, and stakeholders' perceptions of implementation strategies.This study is a mixed methods multiple case study of seven children's social service organizations in one Midwestern city in the United States that compose the control group of a larger randomized controlled trial. Qualitative data will include semi-structured interviews with organizational leaders (e.g., CEOs/directors, clinical directors, program managers) and a review of documents (e.g., implementation and quality improvement plans, program manuals, etc.) that will shed light on implementation decision-making and specific implementation strategies that are used to implement new programs and practices. Additionally, focus groups with clinicians will explore their perceptions of a range of implementation strategies. This qualitative work will inform the development of a Web-based survey that will assess the perceived effectiveness, relative importance, acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of implementation strategies from the perspective of both clinicians and organizational leaders. Finally, the Organizational Social Context measure will be used to assess organizational culture and climate. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods data will be analyzed and interpreted at the case level as well as across cases in order to highlight meaningful similarities, differences, and site-specific experiences.This study is designed to inform efforts to develop more effective implementation strategies by fully describing the implementation experiences of a sample of community-based organizations that provide mental health services to youth in one Midwestern city.

Project description:BackgroundThe implementation of complex interventions is considered challenging, particularly in multi-site clinical trials and dynamic clinical settings. This study protocol is part of the family intensive care units (FICUS) hybrid effectiveness-implementation study. It aims to understand the integration of a multicomponent family support intervention in the real-world context of adult intensive care units (ICUs). Specifically, the study will assess implementation processes and outcomes of the study intervention, including fidelity, and will enable explanation of the clinical effectiveness outcomes of the trial.Methods and analysisThis mixed-methods multiple case study is guided by two implementation theories, the Normalisation Process Theory and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Participants are key clinical partners and healthcare professionals of eight ICUs allocated to the intervention group of the FICUS trial in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. Data will be collected at four timepoints over the 18-month active implementation and delivery phase using qualitative (small group interviews, observation, focus group interviews) and quantitative data collection methods (surveys, logs). Descriptive statistics and parametric and non-parametric tests will be used according to data distribution to analyse within and between cluster differences, similarities and factors associated with fidelity and the level of integration over time. Qualitative data will be analysed using a pragmatic rapid analysis approach and content analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Cantonal Ethics Committee of Zurich BASEC ID 2021-02300 (8 February 2022). Study findings will provide insights into implementation and its contribution to intervention outcomes, enabling understanding of the usefulness of applied implementation strategies and highlighting main barriers that need to be addressed for scaling the intervention to other healthcare contexts. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and conferences.Protocol registration numberOpen science framework (OSF) https://osf.io/8t2ud Registered on 21 December 2022.

Project description:BackgroundInterventions to prevent the use of coercion in psychiatric hospitals have been summarized in the 2018 German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatic's comprehensive guidelines. Twelve recommendations for implementation of these guideline on psychiatric wards have been deducted and their feasibility has been tested in a pilot study, using external implementation consultants as facilitators. The objective of the PreVCo study was to test their effect in a randomised clinical trial.MethodsFifty-four psychiatric wards in Germany treating voluntary and involuntary patients were randomly allocated to either an intervention or to a waiting list condition. The intervention consisted of the implementation of three out of 12 suggested recommendations as selected by the ward teams, supported by external study workers. As the primary outcome measure, the number of coercive measures used per bed and month in the final 3 months of the intervention period was determined. Secondary outcomes were the cumulative duration of coercive measures used per bed and months and assaults per bed and month. Achieved guideline adherence was measured by a fidelity scale developed for this purpose during a pilot study for the PreVCo Rating Tool. After a 3-month baseline collection period under routine conditions, randomisation was done after matching wards pairwise according to frequency of coercive measures used and scores on the PreVCo Rating Tool at baseline. The duration of the intervention period was 12 months; control wards received only an initial workshop presentation of the study and completed their PreVCo ratings. We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the paired t-test and conducted sensitivity analyses for different periods of observation.FindingsNeither the number of coercive measures used per month and bed nor their cumulative duration nor the number of assaults per bed and months differed significantly between the 27 intervention wards and the 27 control wards in the final 3 months of the intervention period. The median number of coercive measures used decreased by 45% (median 0.96 (IQR 1.34)-0.53 (IQR 0.59) from baseline until the end of the intervention period on the intervention wards and by 28% (median 0.98 (IQR 1.71)-0.71 (IQR 1.08) on waiting list wards. The PreVCo Rating Tool showed a significant improvement in intervention wards compared to control wards, indicating a successful implementation.InterpretationThe study demonstrated that guideline adherence could be significantly improved by the intervention. However, there was no evidence for an effect on the frequency or duration of coercive measures used. Spill-over effects and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-patient care might have limited the effect of the intervention. Further research from robust randomised controlled trials are necessary to identify effective interventions to reduce the use of coercion in psychiatric hospitals.FundingThe study was funded by the German Innovationsfonds beim Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (project no. 01VSF19037). The funder had no role in study design or data collection.

Dataset Information

Implementation of national antenatal hypertension guidelines: a multicentre multiple methods study.

Publications

Implementation of national antenatal hypertension guidelines: a multicentre multiple methods study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets