Dataset Information

Why is there variation in the practice of evidence-based medicine in primary care? A qualitative study.

ABSTRACT: To explore the factors, including barriers and facilitators, influencing the practice of evidence-based medicine (EBM) across various primary care settings in Malaysia based on the doctors' views and experiences.The qualitative study was used to answer the research question. 37 primary care physicians participated in six focus group discussions and six individual in-depth interviews. A semistructured topic guide was used to facilitate both the interviews and focus groups, which were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, checked and analysed using a thematic approach.37 primary care doctors including medical officers, family medicine specialists, primary care lecturers and general practitioners with different working experiences and in different settings.The study was conducted across three primary care settings-an academic primary care practice, private and public health clinics in Klang Valley, Malaysia.The doctors in this study were aware of the importance of EBM but seldom practised it. Three main factors influenced the implementation of EBM in the doctors' daily practice. First, there was a lack of knowledge and skills in searching for and applying evidence. Second, workplace culture influenced doctors' practice of EBM. Third, some doctors considered EBM as a threat to good clinical practice. They were concerned that rigid application of evidence compromised personalised patient care and felt that EBM did not consider the importance of clinical experience.Despite being aware of and having a positive attitude towards EBM, doctors in this study seldom practised EBM in their routine clinical practice. Besides commonly cited barriers such as having a heavy workload and lack of training, workplace 'EBM culture' had an important influence on the doctors' behaviour. Strategies targeting barriers at the practice level should be considered when implementing EBM in primary care.

SUBMITTER: Hisham R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4785283 | biostudies-other | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEvidence-Based Medicine (EBM) integrates best available evidence from literature and patients' values, which then informs clinical decision making. However, there is a lack of validated instruments to assess the knowledge, practice and barriers of primary care physicians in the implementation of EBM. This study aimed to develop and validate an Evidence-Based Medicine Questionnaire (EBMQ) in Malaysia.MethodsThe EBMQ was developed based on a qualitative study, literature review and an expert panel. Face and content validity was verified by the expert panel and piloted among 10 participants. Primary care physicians with or without EBM training who could understand English were recruited from December 2015 to January 2016. The EBMQ was administered at baseline and two weeks later. A higher score indicates better knowledge, better practice of EBM and less barriers towards the implementation of EBM. We hypothesized that the EBMQ would have three domains: knowledge, practice and barriers.ResultsThe final version of the EBMQ consists of 80 items: 62 items were measured on a nominal scale, 22 items were measured on a 5 point Likert-scale. Flesch reading ease was 61.2. A total of 343 participants were approached; of whom 320 agreed to participate (response rate?=?93.2%). Factor analysis revealed that the EBMQ had eight domains after 13 items were removed: "EBM websites", "evidence-based journals", "types of studies", "terms related to EBM", "practice", "access", "patient preferences" and "support". Cronbach alpha for the overall EBMQ was 0.909, whilst the Cronbach alpha for the individual domain ranged from 0.657-0.940. The EBMQ was able to discriminate between doctors with and without EBM training for 24 out of 42 items. At test-retest, kappa values ranged from 0.155 to 0.620.ConclusionsThe EBMQ was found to be a valid and reliable instrument to assess the knowledge, practice and barriers towards the implementation of EBM among primary care physicians in Malaysia.

Project description:BackgroundThough much is known about the benefits attributed to medical scribes documenting patient visits (e.g., reducing documentation time for the provider, increasing patient-care time, expanding the roles of licensed and non-licensed personnel), little attention has been paid to how care workers enact scribing as a part of their existing practice. The purpose of this study was to perform an ethnographic process evaluation of an innovative medical scribing practice with primary care teams in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) clinics across the United States. The aim of our study was to understand barriers and facilitators to implementing a scribing practice in primary care.MethodsAt three to six months after medical scribing was introduced, we used semi-structured interviews and direct observations during site visits to five sites to describe the intervention, understand if the intervention was implemented as planned, and to record the experience of the teams who implemented the intervention. This manuscript only reports on semi-structured interview data collected from providers and scribes. Initial matrix analysis based on categories outlined in the evaluation plan informed subsequent deductive coding using the social-shaping theory Normalization Process Theory.ResultsThrough illustrating the slow accumulation of interactions and knowledge that fostered cautious momentum of teams working to normalize scribing practice in VHA primary care clinics, we show how the practice had 1) an organizing effect, as it centered a shared goal (the creation of the note) between the provider, scribe, and patient, and 2) a generative effect, as it facilitated care workers developing relationships that were both interpersonally and inter-professionally valuable. Based on our findings, we suggest that a scribing practice emphasizes the complementarity of existing professional roles, which thus leverage the interactional possibilities already present in the primary care team. Scribing, as a skill, forged moments of interprofessional fit. Scribing, in practice, created opportunities for interpersonal connection.ConclusionsOur research suggests that individuals will notice different benefits to scribing based on their professional expectations and organizational roles related to documenting patient visits.

Project description:BackgroundClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are common tools in policy and clinical practice informing clinical decisions at the bedside, governance of health facilities, health insurer and government spending, and patient choices. South Africa's health sector is transitioning to a national health insurance system, aiming to build on other primary health care initiatives to transform the previously segregated, inequitable services. Within these plans CPGs are an integral tool for delivering standardised and cost effective care. Currently, there is no accepted standard approach to developing, adapting or implementing CPGs efficiently or effectively in South Africa. We explored the current players; drivers; and the context and processes of primary care CPG development from the perspective of stakeholders operating at national level.MethodsWe used a qualitative approach. Sampling was initially purposeful, followed by snowballing and further sampling to reach representivity of primary care service providers. Individual in-depth interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We used thematic content analysis to analyse the data.ResultsWe conducted 37 in-depth interviews from June 2014-July 2015. We found CPG development and implementation were hampered by lack of human and funding resources for technical and methodological work; fragmentation between groups, and between national and provincial health sectors; and lack of agreed systems for CPG development and implementation. Some CPG contributors steadfastly work to improve processes aiming to enhance communication, use of evidence, and transparency to ensure credible guidance is produced. Many interviewed had shared values, and were driven to address inequity, however, resource gaps were perceived to create an enabling environment for commercial interests or personal agendas to drive the CPG development process.ConclusionsOur findings identified strengths and gaps in CPG development processes, and a need for national standards to guide CPG development and implementation. Based on our findings and suggestions from participants, a possible way forward would be for South Africa to have a centrally coordinated CPG unit to address these needs and aspects of fragmentation by devising processes that support collaboration, transparency and credibility across sectors and disciplines. Such an initiative will require adequate resourcing to build capacity and ensure support for the delivery of high quality CPGs for South African primary care.

Dataset Information

Why is there variation in the practice of evidence-based medicine in primary care? A qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets