Dataset Information

Effectiveness of personal letters to healthcare professionals in changing professional behaviours: a systematic review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Letters are regularly sent by healthcare organisations to healthcare professionals to encourage them to take action, change practice or implement guidance. However, whether letters are an effective tool in delivering a change in healthcare professional behaviour is currently uncertain. In addition, there are currently no evidence-based guidelines to support health providers and authorities with advice on how to formulate the communication, what information and behaviour change techniques to include in order to optimise the potential effect on the behaviour of the receivers. To address this research gap, we seek to inform such guidance through this systematic review, which aims to provide comprehensive evidence of the effectiveness of personal letters to healthcare professionals in changing their professional behaviours.

Methods/design

A comprehensive literature search of published and unpublished studies (the grey literature) in electronic databases will be conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that meet our inclusion criteria. We will include RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of personal letters to healthcare professionals in changing professional behaviours. The primary outcome will be behavioural change. The search will be conducted in five electronic databases (from their inception onwards): MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL. We will also conduct supplementary searches in Google Scholar, hand search relevant journals, and conduct backward and forward citation searching for included studies and relevant reviews. A systematic approach to searching, screening, reviewing and data extraction will be applied in accordance with the process recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two researchers will examine titles, abstracts, full-texts for eligibility independently. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool for randomised controlled trials. Disagreements will be resolved by a consensus procedure.

Discussion

Health policy makers across government are expected to benefit from being able to increase compliance in clinical settings by applying theories of behaviour to design of policy communications. The synthesised findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42020167674.

SUBMITTER: Grimani A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8017654 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionConscience is central to moral decision making. In the context of morally pluralistic workplaces today, healthcare professionals' conscience may prompt them to make moral decisions to refrain from providing services they morally disagree with. However, such decisions are largely viewed as contentious, giving rise to polarising arguments for and against healthcare professionals' freedom of conscience. Yet, little work has been done to understand and support healthcare professionals' conscience. Instead, the rising polarity related to healthcare professionals' freedom of conscience stems from a central lack of understanding of what conscience is and the relevance it holds for healthcare professionals' clinical practice. Therefore, the degree and extent to which healthcare professionals are supported to understand and use their conscience is unknown. The objective of this review is to critically analyse the scholarly evidence available to ascertain the effectiveness of interventions that support healthcare professionals to understand and use their conscience in care practice.Methods and analysesAt least two reviewers will systematically review 10 interdisciplinary, scholarly databases to examine qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies including clinical trials pertaining to interventions related to conscience for healthcare professionals. Databases to be searched include: the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Academic Search Complete, ATLA Religion Database, Religion and Philosophy Collection, PhilPapers and Scopus. Databases were searched in May 2021. Study screening, selection, extraction and risk of bias assessments on each study using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be independently conducted by independent reviewers. Descriptive data synthesis will be carried out. Statistical analysis and meta-analysis will be conducted as relevant, based on homogeneity of findings. The quality of the aggregate evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this review. This protocol will not involve individual patient information endangering participant rights. The results will be reported in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated at conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42021256943.

Project description:IntroductionAlthough most healthcare professionals must deal with patients with mental illness, many are not prepared for the various situations that can ensue. Simulation may be a powerful pedagogical tool for simultaneously teaching knowledge, skills and attitudes. We aim to assess the effectiveness of simulation for initial and continuous training in psychiatry for healthcare professionals.Methods and analysisA comprehensive search for randomised and non-randomised controlled studies and single-group pretest/post-test reports will be conducted in electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsychINFO, ERIC, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Web of Science (Science and Social Sciences Citation Index), with a detailed query. The reference lists of selected studies, key journals and trial registers will also be searched for additional studies. Two independent reviewers, following predefined inclusion criteria, will screen titles and abstracts first and then the full texts of the remaining articles. A third author will evaluate discrepancies to reach a consensus. It will include randomised controlled trial (RCT), non-RCT, pre-test/post-test design studies, post-test design for satisfaction evaluation and qualitative studies. Risk of bias will be assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool for assessing risk of bias in RCTs. Meta-analyses will be performed if we find sufficient studies that assess predefined outcomes and if their characteristics are not too different. The quality of evidence will be assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. A narrative synthesis will be performed for qualitative studies and when meta-analyses are deemed not possible.Ethics and disseminationEthics permission is not required. Dissemination will be through publication in peer-reviewed journals, national and international conferences, and the lead author's doctoral dissertation.Trial registration numberCRD42017078779.

Project description:BACKGROUND: There is an important gap between the implications of clinical research evidence and the routine clinical practice of healthcare professionals. Because individual decisions are often central to adoption of a clinical-related behaviour, more information about the cognitive mechanisms underlying behaviours is needed to improve behaviour change interventions targeting healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to systematically review the published scientific literature about factors influencing health professionals' behaviours based on social cognitive theories. These theories refer to theories where individual cognitions/thoughts are viewed as processes intervening between observable stimuli and responses in real world situations. METHODS: We searched psycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CIHNAL, Index to theses, PROQUEST dissertations and theses and Current Contents for articles published in English only. We included studies that aimed to predict healthcare professionals' intentions and behaviours with a clear specification of relying on a social cognitive theory. Information on percent of explained variance (R(2)) was used to compute the overall frequency-weighted mean R(2) to evaluate the efficacy of prediction in several contexts and according to different methodological aspects. The cognitive factors most consistently associated with prediction of healthcare professionals' intention and behaviours were documented. RESULTS: Seventy eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Among these studies, 72 provided information on the determinants of intention and 16 prospective studies provided information on the determinants of behaviour. The theory most often used as reference was the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) or its extension the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). An overall frequency-weighted mean R(2) of 0.31 was observed for the prediction of behaviour; 0.59 for the prediction of intention. A number of moderators influenced the efficacy of prediction; frequency-weighted mean R(2) varied from 0.001 to 0.58 for behaviour and 0.19 to 0.81 for intention. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the TPB appears to be an appropriate theory to predict behaviour whereas other theories better capture the dynamic underlying intention. In addition, given the variations in efficacy of prediction, special care should be given to methodological issues, especially to better define the context of behaviour performance.

Project description:BackgroundThe Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Model of continuing tele-education is an innovative guided-practice model aiming at amplifying healthcare professionals' competencies in the management of chronic and complex health conditions. While data on the impact of the ECHO model is increasingly available in the literature, what influences the model effectiveness remains unclear. Therefore, the overarching aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise, and synthesize the available quantitative (QUAN) and qualitative (QUAL) evidence regarding the ECHO Model effectiveness and the experiences/views of ECHO's participants about what influences the development of competencies in healthcare professionals.MethodsThe proposed systematic review was inspired by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for Mixed Methods Systematic Reviews (MMSR) and will follow a convergent segregated approach. A systematic search will be undertaken using QUAN, QUAL and mixed methods (MM) studies of ECHO-affiliated programs identified in six databases. A publication date filter will be applied to find the articles published from 2003 onwards. Sources of unpublished studies and gray literature will be searched as well. Retrieved citations will independently be screened by two reviewers. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion until a consensus is reached or by including a third reviewer. Studies meeting the predefined inclusion criteria will be assessed on methodological quality and the data will be extracted using standardized data extraction forms. Separate QUAN and QUAL synthesis will be performed, and findings will be integrated using a matrix approach for the purpose of comparison and complementarity.DiscussionThis MMSR will fulfill important gaps in the current literature on the ECHO Model as the first to provide estimates on its effectiveness and consider simultaneously the experiences/views of ECHO's participants. As each replication of the ECHO Model greatly varies depending on the context, topic, and targeted professionals, a better understanding of what influences the model effectiveness in developing healthcare professionals' competencies is crucial to inform future implementation.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020197579.

Project description:IntroductionHealthcare professionals' shortage, low job satisfaction, high levels of burnout, and excessive staff turnover are some of the challenges health systems face worldwide. In Switzerland, healthcare stakeholders have called to address the health workforce crisis and have pointed out the scarcity of data on the conditions of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Hence, the Swiss Cohort of Healthcare Professionals and Informal Caregivers (SCOHPICA) was developed to study the career trajectories, well-being, intention to stay in or leave the position/profession/health sector, and their determinants, of HCPs and informal caregivers, respectively. This paper describes the protocol for the HCPs cohort of SCOHPICA and discusses its implications.MethodsSCOHPICA is a prospective open cohort using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. All types of HCPs working directly with patients and practicing in Switzerland are eligible, irrespective of their healthcare setting and employment status. Baseline and annual follow-up electronic surveys will take place once a year, featuring both core questions and modules developed according to information needs. While outcome variables are HCPs' trajectories, well-being, intention to stay in or leave the position/profession/health sector, independent variables include organizational, psychosocial, and psychological determinants, as well as occupational (professional) and sociodemographic factors. The qualitative phase will be organized every two years, inviting participants who agreed to take part in this phase. The findings from quantitative analyses, along with the issues raised by healthcare stakeholders in the field, will guide the topics investigated in the qualitative phase.DiscussionUsing innovative methodologies, SCOHPICA will gather nationwide and longitudinal data on HCPs practicing in Switzerland. These data could have numerous implications: promoting the development of research related to HCPs' well-being and retention intentions; supporting the development of policies to improve working conditions and career prospects; contributing to the evolution of training curricula for future or current healthcare professionals; aiding in the development of health systems capable of delivering quality care; and finally, providing the general public and stakeholders with free and open access to the study results through an online dashboard.

Project description:ObjectiveThe development and pilot of a self-report questionnaire, to assess personal and professional development of healthcare professionals gained through experiences in low-income and middle-income countries.DesignThe instrument was developed from a core set of the outcomes of international placements for UK healthcare professionals. Principal component analysis and multidimensional item response theory were conducted using results of a cross-sectional pilot study to highlight items with the best psychometric properties.SettingQuestionnaires were completed both online and in multiple UK healthcare professional events face-to-face.Participants436 healthcare professional participants from the UK (with and without international experience) completed a 110-item questionnaire in which they assessed their knowledge, skills and attitudes.MeasuresThe 110-item questionnaire included self-report questions on a 7-point Likert scale of agreement, developed from the core outcome set, including items on satisfaction, clinical skills, communication and other important healthcare professional knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours. Item reduction led to development of the 40-item Measuring the Outcomes of Volunteering for Education-Tool. Internal consistency was evaluated by the Cronbach's α coefficient. Exploratory analysis investigated the structure of the data using principal component analysis and multivariate item response theory.ResultsExploratory analysis found 10 principal components that explained 71.80% of the variance. Components were labelled 'attitude to work, adaptability, adapting communication, cultural sensitivity, difficult communication, confidence, teaching, management, behaviour change and life satisfaction'. Internal consistency was acceptable for the identified components (α=0.72-0.86).ConclusionsA 40-item self-report questionnaire developed from a core outcome set for personal and professional development from international placements was developed, with evidence of good reliability and validity. This questionnaire will increase understanding of impact of international placements, facilitating comparisons of different types of experience. This will aid decision making about whether UK healthcare professionals should be encouraged to volunteer internationally and in what capacity.