Dataset Information

Patients' and professionals' perspectives on implementation of opportunistic salpingectomy: a mixed-method study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To prevent ovarian cancer, several international societies have issued guidelines which recommend to discuss opportunistic salpingectomy with women undergoing pelvic surgery after completion of childbearing. The opportunistic salpingectomy refers to the additional removal of Fallopian tubes during pelvic surgery for another indication to reduce the risk of developing ovarian cancer. These recommendations emphasize the importance of counselling on benefits and risks of opportunistic salpingectomy but offer no guidance on their implementation in daily practice. The lack of a tailored implementation strategy has resulted in a wide variation in current practice. To reduce this practice variation, we identified influencing factors on implementing opportunistic salpingectomy from patients' and professionals' perspectives.

Methods

We conducted a mixed-method study between 2019 and 2020 throughout the Netherlands. In a qualitative phase, we conducted interviews with gynecologic patients (N = 11) and their professionals (N = 20) to explore barriers and facilitators, using an interview guide. In the quantitative phase, we quantified these barriers and facilitators among patients who underwent a hysterectomy or sterilization and were counselled on the opportunistic salpingectomy (N = 77), and members of the Dutch Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (N = 204), using questionnaires. For both phases, barriers and facilitators were classified into the following domains: innovation, patient, healthcare professional, social setting, organization, and economic and political context.

Results

For patients, main barriers were lack of knowledge about: the existence of the opportunistic salpingectomy (45%), size of the surgery (44%) and its associated possible disadvantages (37%). In addition, patients attributed their reluctance to concerns about the removal of healthy organs (46%). For professionals, main barriers were: patients' lack of knowledge of the size of surgery (85%) and its associated possible disadvantages (77%), the gap in evidence on long term risks and benefits (43%), the lack of feasibility in certain patients and during vaginal surgery (66%). Both patients (41%) and professionals (67%) identified the need for counselling material as facilitator.

Conclusion

To reduce the variety in care regarding opportunistic salpingectomy, consensus and uniform counselling is needed. Including the opportunistic salpingectomy in gynecological guidelines and a decision aid for counselling could serve as tools to facilitate implementation.

SUBMITTER: Gelderblom ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8310584 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceOpportunistic salpingectomy (OS), which is the removal of fallopian tubes during hysterectomy or instead of tubal ligation without removal of ovaries, is recommended to prevent ovarian cancer, particularly serous ovarian cancer. However, the effectiveness of OS is still undetermined.ObjectiveTo examine observed vs expected rates of ovarian cancer among individuals who have undergone OS.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all individuals in British Columbia, Canada, who underwent OS or a control surgery (hysterectomy alone or tubal ligation) between 2008 and 2017, with follow-up until December 31, 2017. Those with any gynecological cancer diagnosed before or within 6 months of their procedure were excluded. Data analysis was performed from April to August 2021.ExposuresRemoval of both fallopian tubes at the time of hysterectomy or instead of tubal ligation while leaving ovaries intact.Main outcomes and measuresAn ovarian cancer diagnosis listed in the British Columbia Cancer Registry. Age-specific rates of epithelial and serous ovarian cancer in the control group were combined with the specific follow-up time in the OS group to calculate expected numbers (and 95% CIs) of ovarian cancers in the OS group. These were compared with observed numbers. Age-adjusted expected and observed numbers of breast and colorectal cancers were also examined in the OS group.ResultsThere were 25 889 individuals who underwent OS (mean [SD] age, 40.2 [7.1] years; median [IQR] follow-up, 3.2 [1.6-5.1] years) and 32 080 who underwent hysterectomy alone or tubal ligation (mean [SD] age, 38.2 [7.9] years; median [IQR] follow-up, 7.3 [4.6-8.7] years). There were no serous ovarian cancers in the OS group and 5 or fewer epithelial ovarian cancers. The age-adjusted expected number was 5.27 (95% CI, 1.78-19.29) serous cancers and 8.68 (95% CI, 3.36-26.58) epithelial ovarian cancers. Age-adjusted expected vs observed numbers of breast cancers (22.1 expected vs 23 observed) and colorectal cancers (9.35 expected vs 8 observed) were not significantly different.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, the OS group had significantly fewer serous and epithelial ovarian cancers than were expected according to the rate at which they arose in the control group. These findings suggest that OS is associated with reduced ovarian cancer risk.

Project description:BackgroundThe First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service has been shown to reduce the wait for care and improve clinical outcomes in initial evaluations. These findings led to the national scaling of FREED in England. To support this scaling, we conducted a mixed method evaluation of the perceptions and experiences of clinicians in the early phases of scaling. The Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual lens to understand if and how FREED becomes embedded in routine practice.MethodsThe convergent mixed method evaluation included 21 semi-structured interviews with clinicians from early adopter sites and 211 surveys administered to clinicians before, immediately after and 3 months after the FREED training. The interview guide and survey included questions evaluating attitudes towards early intervention for eating disorders (EDs) and NPT mechanisms. Interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. The NPT was applied to the inductively derived themes to evaluate if and how NPT domains impacted the implementation. Survey data were analysed using multilevel growth models.ResultsSix themes and 15 subthemes captured barriers and facilitators to implementation at the patient, clinician, service, intervention, implementation and wider system levels. These interacted with the NPT mechanisms to facilitate or hinder the embedding of FREED. Overall, clinicians were enthusiastic and positive towards early intervention for EDs and FREED, largely because of the expectation of improved patient outcomes. This was a considerable driver in the uptake and implementation of FREED. Clinicians also had reservations about capacity and the potential impact on other patients, which, at times, was a barrier for its use. The FREED training led to significant improvements in positive attitudes and NPT mechanisms that were largely maintained at the 3-month follow-up. However, negative attitudes did not significantly improve following training.ConclusionsPositive attitudes towards early intervention for EDs increased enthusiasm and engagement with the model. Features of the model and its implementation were effective at developing adopter commitment and capabilities. However, there were aspects of the model and its implementation which require attention in the future (e.g., capacity and the potential impact on the wider service).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Hysterectomy is a common procedure worldwide and removing healthy fallopian tubes at the time of hysterectomy (opportunistic salpingectomy) to possibly prevent ovarian cancer is increasing in frequency, but still controversial. The experiences and perceptions of women, eligible for the procedure, have not been previously investigated. This study aims to, among women waiting to undergo hysterectomy, explore i) experiences and perceptions of self and healthcare in relation to their elective surgery, ii) perceptions of risks and benefits of hysterectomy, including opportunistic salpingectomy. METHODS:A qualitative study, with focus group discussions including women <?55?years, planned for hysterectomy with ovarian preservation, was performed. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling from six gynecological departments in different parts of Sweden, including both country and university hospitals. Focus group discussions were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide, digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed by qualitative manifest and latent content analysis. RESULTS:Twenty-one Swedish-speaking women participated. They were 40-53?years of age, reported varying educational levels, countries of birth and indications for hysterectomy. Analysis rendered a theme "Bridging different realities" over four categories: "Being a woman today", "Experiencing and managing body failure", "Navigating the healthcare system" and "Processing continuously until surgery", including 17 subcategories. The participants displayed varying attitudes towards the significance of their uterus in being a woman. A vague understanding of their body was described, leading to fear related to the reasons for surgery as well as surgery itself. Participants described difficulties understanding and recalling information but also stated that insufficient information was provided. Perceptions of the risks and benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy varied. Involvement in decisions regarding the hysterectomy and potential opportunistic salpingectomy was perceived to be dependent on the counselling gynecologist. CONCLUSIONS:The theme Bridging different realities captures the complexity of women deciding on removal of their uterus, and possibly fallopian tubes. It also describes the women's interactions with healthcare and perceived difference between the health professionals and the women's perception of the situation, as viewed by the women. Bridging the different realities faced by patients is required to enable shared decision-making, through sufficient support from healthcare.

Project description:ObjectivesManual therapy in infants is embedded in Dutch healthcare despite inconsistent evidence and ongoing debate about its safety and merits. This study examines decision-making in manual therapy in infants and explores parents' and healthcare professionals' perspectives on this treatment approach.MethodsThis mixed-methods study consisted of an online survey among manual physiotherapists and paediatric physiotherapists exploring decision-making on manual therapy in infants and interprofessional collaboration. These data prompted further exploration and were combined with data collected with semi-structured interviews exploring parents' and healthcare professionals' perspectives. Interviews were analysed using an inductive content analysis approach.Results607 manual physiotherapists and 388 paediatric physiotherapists completed the online survey; 45% and 95% indicated they treat infants, respectively. Collaboration was reported by 46% of manual physiotherapists and 64% of paediatric physiotherapists for postural asymmetry, positional preference, upper cervical dysfunction, excessive crying, anxiety or restlessness. Reasons to not treat or collaborate were: limited professional competence, practice policy, not perceiving added value, lack of evidence and fear of complications. Analysis of interviews with 7 parents, 9 manual physiotherapists, 7 paediatric physiotherapists, 5 paediatricians and 2 maternity nurses revealed that knowledge and beliefs, professional norms, interpersonal relation, treatment experiences and emotions of parents influenced attitudes and decision-making towards choosing for manual therapy in infants.ConclusionParents' and healthcare professionals' attitudes towards manual therapy in infants can be divided as 'in favour' or 'against'. Those who experienced a good interpersonal relation with a manual physiotherapist and positive treatment outcomes reported positive attitudes. Lack of evidence, treatment experience and related knowledge, safety issues due to publications on adverse events and professional norms led to negative attitudes. Despite lacking evidence, positive treatment experiences, good interpersonal relation and parents feeling frustrated and despaired can overrule negative attitudes and directly influence the decision-making process and choosing for manual therapy treatment.

Project description:BackgroundPhysical activity is central to maintaining the quality of life for patients with complex chronic conditions and is thus at the core of neurorehabilitation. However, maintaining activity improvements in daily life is challenging. The novel Stay With It program aims to promote physical activity after neurorehabilitation by cultivating self-monitoring skills and habits.ObjectiveWe examined the implementation of the Stay With It program at the Valens Rehabilitation Centre in Switzerland using the normalization process theory framework, focusing on 3 research aims. We aimed to examine the challenges and facilitators of program implementation from the perspectives of patients and health care professionals. We aimed to evaluate the potential of activity sensors to support program implementation and patient acceptance. Finally, we aimed to evaluate patients' engagement in physical activity after rehabilitation, patients' self-reported achievement of home activity goals, and factors influencing physical activity.MethodsPatients were enrolled if they had a disease that was either chronic or at risk for chronicity and participated in the Stay With It program. Patients were assessed at baseline, the end of rehabilitation, and a 3-month follow-up. The health care professionals designated to deliver the program were surveyed before and after program implementation. We used a mixed methods approach combining standardized questionnaires, activity-sensing data (patients only), and free-text questions.ResultsThis study included 23 patients and 13 health care professionals. The diverse needs of patients and organizational hurdles were major challenges to program implementation. Patients' intrinsic motivation and health care professionals' commitment to refining the program emerged as key facilitators. Both groups recognized the value of activity sensors in supporting program implementation and sustainability. Although patients appreciated the sensor's ability to monitor, motivate, and quantify activity, health care professionals saw the sensor as a motivational tool but expressed concerns about technical difficulties and potential inaccuracies. Physical activity levels after patients returned home varied considerably, both within and between individuals. The self-reported achievement of activity goals at home also varied, in part because of vague definitions. Common barriers to maintaining activity at home were declining health and fatigue often resulting from heat and pain. At the 3-month follow-up, 35% (8/23) of the patients withdrew from the study, with most citing deteriorating physical health as the reason and that monitoring and discussing their low activity would negatively affect their mental health.ConclusionsIntegrating aftercare programs like Stay With It into routine care is vital for maintaining physical activity postrehabilitation. Although activity trackers show promise in promoting motivation through monitoring, they may lead to frustration during health declines. Their acceptability may also be influenced by an individual's health status, habits, and technical skills. Our study highlights the importance of considering health care professionals' perspectives when integrating new interventions into routine care.

Project description:PurposeTo examine adolescent experiences and perspectives of the GoActive intervention (ISRCTN31583496) using mixed methods process evaluation to determine satisfaction with intervention components and interpret adolescents' experiences of the intervention process in order to provide insights for future intervention design.MethodsParticipants (n = 1542; 13.2 ± 0.4 years, mean ± SD) provided questionnaire data at baseline (shyness, activity level) and post-intervention (intervention acceptability, satisfaction with components). Between-group differences (boys vs. girls and shy/inactive vs. others) were tested with linear regression models, accounting for school clustering. Data from 16 individual interviews (shy/inactive) and 11 focus groups with 48 participants (mean = 4; range 2-7) were thematically coded. Qualitative and quantitative data were merged in an integrative mixed methods convergence matrix, which denoted convergence and dissonance across datasets.ResultsEffect sizes for quantitative results were small and may not represent substantial between-group differences. Boys (vs. girls) preferred class-based sessions (β = 0.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1-0.3); qualitative data suggested that this was because boys preferred competition, which was supported quantitatively (β = 0.2, 95%CI: 0.1-0.3). Shy/inactive students did not enjoy the competition (β = -0.3, 95%CI: -0.5 to -0.1). Boys enjoyed trying new activities more (β = 0.1, 95%CI: 0.1-0.2); qualitative data indicated a desire to try new activities across all subgroups but identified barriers to choosing unfamiliar activities with self-imposed choice restriction leading to boredom. Qualitative data highlighted critique of mentorship; adolescents liked the idea, but older mentors did not meet expectations.ConclusionWe interpreted adolescent perspectives of intervention components and implementation to provide insights into future complex interventions aimed at increasing young people's physical activity in school-based settings. The intervention component mentorship was liked in principle, but implementation issues undesirably impacted satisfaction; competition was disliked by girls and shy/inactive students. The results highlight the importance of considering gender differences in preference of competition and extensive mentorship training.

Project description:BackgroundIn the last years, patients' empowerment has been increasingly recognized as a crucial dimension of patient-centered healthcare and patient safety. Nevertheless, little work has been done so far in the field of patient safety to investigate strategies for empowering psychiatric patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify, by using focus groups, whether and how psychiatric patients' empowerment can improve risk management according to the perspective of healthcare providers (HPs).MethodsA mixed-method approach composed of a qualitative data collection method (i.e., focus groups) and a quantitative analysis technique (i.e., inductive content analysis) was applied. HPs working in mental health settings shared their perspectives on psychiatric patients' empowerment in risk management. After the transcription of the audio-taped discussions and the subsequent development of a hierarchical four-level coding system (strategy versus critical issue, thematic area, category, subcategory), two independent raters codified the transcripts and synthesized the content. Absolute frequencies are reported for quantitative data.ResultsTwelve focus groups consisting of six to ten participants, each with an overall sample size of 95 participants (65 women; average age ± SD 47 ± 9 yrs), were enrolled. A total of 1252 participants' verbal contributions (i.e., units of analysis) were assessed. Strategies and critical issues (Level 1) were mentioned almost equally (52 and 48%, respectively) by the HPs. Most of the contributions at Level 2 referred to the thematic areas Treatment and Cure (69%) and Emergency Management (21%). In the area Treatment and Cure, the category Therapeutic Compliance (Level 3) was discussed in one third of all contributions.ConclusionsOur results suggest that HPs consider patients as crucial partners in risk management and expect them to play a key role in actively enhancing safety. Policy makers should be aware that risk management in mental health settings particularly relies on the therapeutic relationship between HPs and patients. Therefore, allocating sufficient human and financial resources to mental health care aiming to further support the relationship between patients and HPs is of utmost importance.