Enhanced Primary Health Care Intervention: Perceived Sustainability and Challenges Among Implementers.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
This study aimed to assess and explore perceived sustainability and challenges of the intervention among Health Care Providers (HCPs) who were involved.Methods
The study applied mixed-method embedded design to analyze both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative approach was used to evaluate sustainability perception from 20 intervention clinics via self-reported assessment form whereas qualitative data were obtained through in-depth interview (IDI) and focus group discussions (FGDs) 14 health care professionals participated in IDI session and were either care coordinators, liaison officers (LOs)/clinic managers, or medical officers-in-charge for the clinic's intervention. Nine FGDs conducted comprised 58 HCPs from various categories.Results
HCPs from all the 20 clinics involved responded to each listed Enhanced Primary Healthcare (EnPHC) intervention components as being implemented but the perceived sustainability of these implementation varies between them. Quantitative feedback showed sustainable interventions included risk stratification, non-communicable disease (NCD) screening form, referral within clinics and hospitals, family health team (FHT), MTAC services and mechanisms and medical adherence status. Qualitative feedback highlighted implementation of each intervention components comes with its challenges, and most of it are related to inadequate resources and facilities in clinic. HCPs made initiatives to adapt based on clinical setting to implement the interventions at best level possible, whereby this seems to be one of the core values for sustainability.Conclusion
Overall perceptions among HCPs on sustainability of EnPHC interventions are highly influenced by current experiences with existing resources. Components perceived to have inadequate resources are seen as a challenge to sustain. It's crucial for stakeholders to understand implications affecting implementation process if concerns raised are not addressed and allocation of needed resources to ensure overall successfulness and long term sustainability.
SUBMITTER: Perialathan K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8114286 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundChronic diseases are a significant public health concern, particularly in older adults. To address the delivery of health care services to optimally meet the needs of older adults with multiple chronic diseases, Health TAPESTRY (Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality) uses a novel approach that involves patient home visits by trained volunteers to collect and transmit relevant health information using e-health technology to inform appropriate care from an inter-professional healthcare team. Health TAPESTRY was implemented, pilot tested, and evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (analysis underway). Knowledge translation (KT) interventions such as Health TAPESTRY should involve an investigation of their sustainability and scalability determinants to inform further implementation. However, this is seldom considered in research or considered early enough, so the objectives of this study were to assess the sustainability and scalability potential of Health TAPESTRY from the perspective of the team who developed and pilot-tested it.MethodsOur objectives were addressed using a sequential mixed-methods approach involving the administration of a validated, sustainability survey developed by the National Health Service (NHS) to all members of the Health TAPESTRY team who were actively involved in the development, implementation and pilot evaluation of the intervention (Phase 1: n = 38). Mean sustainability scores were calculated to identify the best potential for improvement across sustainability factors. Phase 2 was a qualitative study of interviews with purposively selected Health TAPESTRY team members to gain a more in-depth understanding of the factors that influence the sustainability and scalability Health TAPESTRY. Two independent reviewers coded transcribed interviews and completed a multi-step thematic analysis. Outcomes were participant perceptions of the determinants influencing the sustainability and scalability of Health TAPESTRY.ResultsTwenty Health TAPESTRY team members (53% response rate) completed the NHS sustainability survey. The overall mean sustainability score was 64.6 (range 22.8-96.8). Important opportunities for improving sustainability were better staff involvement and training, clinical leadership engagement, and infrastructure for sustainability. Interviews with 25 participants (response rate 60%) showed that factors influencing the sustainability and scalability of Health TAPESTRY emerged across two dimensions: I) Health TAPESTRY operations (development and implementation activities undertaken by the central team); and II) the Health TAPESTRY intervention (factors specific to the intervention and its elements). Resource capacity appears to be an important factor to consider for Health TAPESTRY operations as it was identified across both sustainability and scalability factors; and perceived lack of interprofessional team and volunteer resource capacity and the need for stakeholder buy-in are important considerations for the Health TAPESTRY intervention. We used these findings to create actionable recommendations to initiate dialogue among Health TAPESTRY team members to improve the intervention.ConclusionsOur study identified sustainability and scalability determinants of the Health TAPESTRY intervention that can be used to optimize its potential for impact. Next steps will involve using findings to inform a guide to facilitate sustainability and scalability of Health TAPESTRY in other jurisdictions considering its adoption. Our findings build on the limited current knowledge of sustainability, and advances KT science related to the sustainability and scalability of KT interventions.
| S-EPMC5540508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Introduction: The ankle-brachial index (ABI) is the most widely used method of diagnosing peripheral arterial disease (PAD). However, the uptake of ABIs has been reported to be low in primary care settings across different various healthcare settings; however, this is yet to be investigated within the Canadian context. (2) Objective: Therefore, we sought to assess the rates of ABI usage as well as perceived barriers among primary care practitioners (PCPs) in Toronto, Canada. (3) Methods: A modified questionnaire was electronically sent to 257 PCPs in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Questions pertained to frequency, feasibility, utility, and barriers associated with ABI usage in clinical practice. Responses were collected and tallied. (4) Results: A total of 52 PCPs completed the questionnaire. 79% of PCPs did not routinely perform ABIs within their clinical practice, and 56% deemed ABI usage as unfeasible. Constraints in time and staff personnel, as well as complexity of ABI result interpretation, were cited as the major perceived barriers to ABI usage. The overwhelming majority of PCPs viewed alternative forms of diagnosis, such as a blood test for PAD, as being preferable to ABI, as such an approach would enhance diagnostic simplicity and efficiency. (5) Conclusion: ABI usage rates are poor within primary care practices in Toronto, Canada. Alternative approaches for diagnosing PAD may result in greater adoption rates among PCPs and therefore improve the identification of patients with PAD.
| S-EPMC8509610 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPromising health interventions tested in pilot studies will only achieve population-wide impact if they are implemented at scale across communities and health systems. Scaling up effective health interventions is vital as not doing so denies the community the most effective services and programmes. However, there remains a paucity of practical tools to assess the suitability of health interventions for scale-up. The Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT) was developed to support policy-makers and practitioners to make systematic assessments of the suitability of health interventions for scale-up.MethodsThe ISAT was developed over three stages; the first stage involved a literature review to identify similar tools and frameworks that could be used to guide scalability assessments, and expert input to develop draft ISAT content. In the second stage, the draft ISAT tool was tested with end users. The third stage involved revising and re-testing the ISAT with end users to further refine the language and structure of the final ISAT.ResultsA variety of information and sources of evidence should be used to complete the ISAT. The ISAT consists of three parts. Part A: 'setting the scene' requires consideration of the context in which the intervention is being considered for scale-up and consists of five domains, as follows: (1) the problem; (2) the intervention; (3) strategic/political context; (4) evidence of effectiveness; and (5) intervention costs and benefits. Part B asks users to assess the potential implementation and scale-up requirements within five domains, namely (1) fidelity and adaptation; (2) reach and acceptability; (3) delivery setting and workforce; (4) implementation infrastructure; and (5) sustainability. Part C generates a graphical representation of the strengths and weaknesses of the readiness of the proposed intervention for scale-up. Users are also prompted for a recommendation as to whether the intervention (1) is recommended for scale-up, (2) is promising but needs further information before scaling up, or (3) does not yet merit scale-up.ConclusionThe ISAT fills an important gap in applied scalability assessment and can become a critical decision support tool for policy-makers and practitioners when selecting health interventions for scale-up. Although the ISAT is designed to be a health policy and practitioner tool, it can also be used by researchers in the design of research to fill important evidence gaps.
| S-EPMC6942323 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGoals for Eating and Moving (GEM) is a technology-assisted health coaching intervention to improve weight management in primary care at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) that we designed through prior rigorous formative studies. GEM is integrated within the patient-centered medical home and utilizes student health coach volunteers to counsel patients and encourage participation in VHA's intensive weight management program, MOVE!. The primary aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of GEM when compared to Enhanced Usual Care (EUC). Our secondary aim was to test the impact of GEM on weight, diet and physical activity when compared to EUC.MethodsVeterans with a Body Mass Index ≥30 kg/m2 or 25-29.9 kg/m2 with comorbidities (n = 45) were recruited in two phases and randomized to GEM (n = 22) or EUC (n = 23). We collected process measures (e.g. number of coaching calls completed, number and types of lifestyle goals, counseling documentation) and qualitative feedback on quality of counseling and acceptability of call duration. We also measured weight and behavioral outcomes.ResultsGEM participants reported receiving high quality counseling from health coaches and that call duration and frequency were acceptable. They received 5.9 (SD = 3.7) of 12 coaching calls on average, and number of coaching calls completed was associated with greater weight loss at 6-months in GEM participants (Spearman Coefficient = 0.71, p < 0.001). Four participants from GEM and two from EUC attended the MOVE! program. PCPs completed clinical reminders in 12% of PCP visits with GEM participants. Trends show that GEM participants (n = 21) tended to lose more weight at 3-, 6-, and 12-months as compared to EUC, but this was not statistically significant. There were no significant differences in diet or physical activity.ConclusionsWe found that a technology assisted health coaching intervention delivered within primary care using student health coaches was feasible and acceptable to Veteran patients. This pilot study helped elucidate challenges such as low provider engagement, difficulties with health coach continuity, and low patient attendance in MOVE! which we have addressed and plan to test in future studies.Trial registrationNCT03006328 Retrospectively registered on December 30, 2016.
| S-EPMC6360675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is heralded as an approach that might augment or substitute for the limited processing power of the human brain of primary health care (PHC) professionals. However, there are concerns that AI-mediated decisions may be hard to validate and challenge, or may result in rogue decisions.ObjectiveTo form consensus about perceptions, issues, and challenges of AI in primary care.MethodA three-round Delphi study was conducted. Round 1 explored experts' viewpoints on AI in PHC (n=20). Round 2 rated the appropriateness of statements arising from round one (n=12). The third round was an online panel discussion of findings (n=8) with the members of both the International Medical Informatics Association and the European Federation of Medical Informatics Primary Health Care Informatics Working Groups.ResultsPHC and informatics experts reported AI has potential to improve managerial and clinical decisions and processes, and this would be facilitated by common data standards. The respondents did not agree that AI applications should learn and adapt to clinician preferences or behaviour and they did not agree on the extent of AI potential for harm to patients. It was more difficult to assess the impact of AI-based applications on continuity and coordination of care.ConclusionWhile the use of AI in medicine should enhance healthcare delivery, we need to ensure meticulous design and evaluation of AI applications. The primary care informatics community needs to be proactive and to guide the ethical and rigorous development of AI applications so that they will be safe and effective.
| S-EPMC6697547 | biostudies-literature
Project description:China has substantially increased financial investment and introduced favourable policies for strengthening its primary health care system with core responsibilities in preventing and managing chronic diseases such as hypertension and emerging infectious diseases such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, widespread gaps in the quality of primary health care still exist. In this Review, we aim to identify the causes for this poor quality, and provide policy recommendations. System challenges include: the suboptimal education and training of primary health-care practitioners, a fee-for-service payment system that incentivises testing and treatments over prevention, fragmentation of clinical care and public health service, and insufficient continuity of care throughout the entire health-care system. The following recommendations merit consideration: (1) enhancement of the quality of training for primary health-care physicians, (2) establishment of performance accountability to incentivise high-quality and high-value care; (3) integration of clinical care with the basic public health services, and (4) strengthening of the coordination between primary health-care institutions and hospitals. Additionally, China should consider modernising its primary health-care system through the establishment of a learning health system built on digital data and innovative technologies.
| S-EPMC7272159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHypertension, a significant risk factor for ischemic heart disease and other chronic conditions, is the third-highest cause of death and disability in Tajikistan. Thus, ensuring the early detection and appropriate management of hypertension is a core element of strategies to improve population health in Tajikistan. For a strategy to be successful, it should be informed by the causes of gaps in service delivery and feasible solutions to these challenges. The objective of this study was to undertake a systematic assessment of hypertension case detection and retention in care within Tajikistan's primary health care system, and to identify challenges and appropriate solutions.MethodsOur mixed methods study drew on the cascade of care framework to examine patient progression through the recommended stages of hypertension care. We triangulated data from household surveys and facility registries within Tajikistan's Health Services Improvement Project (HSIP) to describe the cascade. Focus group discussions with local HSIP stakeholders identified the barriers to and facilitators for care. Drawing on global empirical evidence on effective interventions and stakeholder judgments on the feasibility of implementation, we developed recommendations to improve hypertension service delivery that were informed by our quantitative and qualitative findings.ResultsWe review the results for the case detection stage of the cascade of care, which had the most significant gaps. Of the half a million people with hypertension in Khatlon and Sogd Oblasts (administrative regions), about 10% have been diagnosed in Khatlon and only 5% in Sogd. Barriers to case detection include misinformation about hypertension, ambiguous protocols, and limited delivery capacity. Solutions identified to these challenges were mobilizing faith-based organizations, scaling up screening through health caravans, task-shifting to increase provider supply, and introducing job aids for providers.ConclusionsTranslating findings on discontinuities in care for hypertension and other chronic diseases to actionable policy insights can be facilitated by collaboration with local stakeholders, triangulation of data sources, and identifying the intersection between the feasible and the effective in defining solutions to service delivery challenges.
| S-EPMC6889695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Since the first step in meeting the health needs of primiparous women involves understanding their conditions, the present study aimed to determine the health needs of primiparous women from their own viewpoints. Methods This study had a qualitative approach based on the conventional qualitative content analysis method, in which the purposive sampling method was used. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews. Data saturation was achieved by interviewing 12 participants. To ensure the study was rigorous, the four criteria of credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability were taken into account. Results The findings of this study consisted of 150 codes, 19 subcategories, and 6 categories, as follows: 1) the intense need for social support, 2) the need for prior preparation for pregnancy, 3) fears and worries, 4) the necessity of the availability of the needed infrastructures and requirements in the health center, 5) falling in love with the baby, and 6) seeking information from appropriate sources. Conclusion The present study showed that primiparous women need to receive more social and psychological support from family members and healthcare workers and that it is essential to improve the available infrastructures and services in healthcare centers and to provide the needed counseling to pregnant mothers to enable them to go through the pregnancy period smoothly.
| S-EPMC7520153 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, primary care for frail older people is reactive, time consuming and does not meet patients' needs. A transition is needed towards proactive and integrated care, so that daily functioning and a good quality of life can be preserved. To work towards these goals, two interventions were developed to enhance the care of frail older patients in general practice: a screening and monitoring intervention using routine healthcare data (U-PRIM) and a nurse-led multidisciplinary intervention program (U-CARE). The U-PROFIT trial was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions. The aim of this paper is to describe the U-PROFIT trial design and to discuss methodological issues and challenges.Methods/designThe effectiveness of U-PRIM and U-CARE is being tested in a three-armed, cluster randomized trial in 58 general practices in the Netherlands, with approximately 5000 elderly individuals expected to participate. The primary outcome is the effect on activities of daily living as measured with the Katz ADL index. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, mortality, nursing home admission, emergency department and out-of-hours General Practice (GP), surgery visits, and caregiver burden.DiscussionIn a large, pragmatic trial conducted in daily clinical practice with frail older patients, several challenges and methodological issues will occur. Recruitment and retention of patients and feasibility of the interventions are important issues. To enable broad generalizability of results, careful choices of the design and outcome measures are required. Taking this into account, the U-PROFIT trial aims to provide robust evidence for a structured and integrated approach to provide care for frail older people in primary care.Trial registrationNTR2288.
| S-EPMC3373372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundQuality health services build communities' and patients' trust in health care. It enhances the acceptability of services and increases health service coverage. Quality primary health care is imperative for universal health coverage through expanding health institutions and increasing skilled health professionals to deliver services near to people. Evidence on the quality of health system inputs, interactions between health personnel and clients, and outcomes of health care interventions is necessary. This review summarised indicators, successes, and challenges of the quality of primary health care services.MethodsWe used the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis extensions for scoping reviews to guide the article selection process. A systematic search of literature from PubMed, Web of Science, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted on August 23, 2022, but the preliminary search was begun on July 5, 2022. The Donabedian's quality of care framework, consisting of structure, process and outcomes, was used to operationalise and synthesise the findings on the quality of primary health care.ResultsHuman resources for health, law and policy, infrastructure and facilities, and resources were the common structure indicators. Diagnosis (health assessment and/or laboratory tests) and management (health information, education, and treatment) procedures were the process indicators. Clinical outcomes (cure, mortality, treatment completion), behaviour change, and satisfaction were the common indicators of outcome. Lower cause-specific mortality and a lower rate of hospitalisation in high-income countries were successes, while high mortality due to tuberculosis and the geographical disparity in quality care were challenges in developing countries. There also exist challenges in developed countries (e.g., poor quality mental health care due to a high admission rate). Shortage of health workers was a challenge both in developed and developing countries.ConclusionsQuality of care indicators varied according to the health care problems, which resulted in a disparity in the successes and challenges across countries around the world. Initiatives to improve the quality of primary health care services should ensure the availability of adequate health care providers, equipped health care facilities, appropriate financing mechanisms, enhance compliance with health policy and laws, as well as community and client participation. Additionally, each country should be proactive in monitoring and evaluation of performance indicators in each dimension (structure, process, and outcome) of quality of primary health care services.
| S-EPMC10464348 | biostudies-literature