Darshini Ayton

Implementation of clinical guidelines on diabetes and hypertension in urban Mongolia: a qualitative study of primary care providers' perspectives and experiences

BackgroundHypertension and diabetes, key risk factors for cardiovascular disease, are significant health problems globally. As cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of mortality in Mongolia since 2000, clinical guidelines on arterial hypertension and diabetes were developed and implemented in 2011. This paper explores the barriers and enablers influencing the implementation of these guidelines in the primary care setting.MethodsA phenomenological qualitative study with semi-structured interviews was conducted to explore the implementation of the diabetes and hypertension guidelines at the primary care level, as well as to gain insight into how practitioners view the usability and practicality of the guidelines. Ten family health centres were randomly chosen from a list of all the family health centres (n = 136) located in Ulaanbaatar City. In each centre, a focus group discussion with nurses (n = 20) and individual interviews with practice doctors (n = 10) and practice managers (n = 10) were conducted. Data was analysed using a thematic approach utilising the Theoretical Domains Framework.ResultsThe majority of the study participants reported being aware of the guidelines and that they had incorporated them into their daily practice. They also reported having attended guideline training sessions which were focused on practice skill development. The majority of participants expressed satisfaction with the wide range of resources that had been supplied to them by the Mongolian Government to assist with the implementation of the guidelines. The resources, supplied from 2011 onwards, included screening devices, equipment for blood tests, medications and educational materials. Other enablers were the participants’ commitment and passion for guideline implementation and their belief in the simplicity and practicality of the guidelines. Primary care providers reported a number of challenges in implementing the guidelines, including frustration caused by increased workload and long waiting times, time constraints, difficulties with conflicting tasks and low patient health literacy.ConclusionsThis study provides evidence that comprehensive and rigorous dissemination and implementation strategies increase the likelihood of successful implementation of new guidelines in low resource primary care settings. It also offers some key lessons that might be carefully considered when other evidence-based clinical guidelines are to be put into effect in low resource settings and elsewhere.

Exploring the partnership networks of churches and church-affiliated organisations in health promotion

Health promotion professionals often work with community organisations and voluntary associations, including churches and church-affiliated organisations, to reduce health inequities within communities. How voluntary and church-affiliated organisations form intersectoral relationships and partnerships, and the challenges they face in doing so, has been well researched. However, there is a need to investigate further the extent to which local churches collaborate or form partnerships with other actors, such as government, peak bodies and welfare organisations. This paper reports a Victorian-based mapping exercise of partnerships and funding involving document analysis of the annual reports from 126 organisations and 35 interviews conducted with church-affiliated organisations and local churches. The discussion begins with the exploration of the nature of, and the reason why churches partner with other sectors. The paper also examines funding sources and partnership pathways that churches access to undertake the activities and programs they conduct. Interview themes highlight the value to churches of the sharing of expertise and resources, the provision of support to communities, a shared ethos of social justice and the empowerment of vulnerable populations. The findings about the extent to which local churches are involved in partnerships across society, and the extent of public and private funds they draw on to provide resources and assistance to local communities, indicate that churches are now a key player not just in welfare provision but also in health promotion activities. The findings contribute to the understanding of church activities in relation to health promotion and will assist organisations who may be potential partners to consider their collaborative efforts in the health promotion field.

Historical overview of church involvement in health and wellbeing in Australia: implications for health promotion partnerships

Health promotion practice requires partnerships with different sectors of society and at all levels of government to achieve health equity as the prerequisites for health include domains that exist outside of the health sphere. Therefore existing partnerships for health need to be strengthened and the potential for new partnerships must be considered in order to address health holistically. The literature base exploring the church as a partner and setting for health promotion is predominantly from the US and therefore there is a need for research exploring the opportunities and challenges of partnering with churches in the Australian context. This paper presents an historical overview of the involvement of churches and church affiliated organisations in health and welfare in Australia recognising that while some of the values, practices and beliefs of churches may have considerable synergies with health promotion, others may be sources of contention or difference.

Barriers and enablers to the implementation of the 6-PACK falls prevention program: A pre-implementation study in hospitals participating in a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Evidence for effective falls prevention interventions in acute wards is limited. One reason for this may be suboptimal program implementation. This study aimed to identify perceived barriers and enablers of the implementation of the 6-PACK falls prevention program to inform the implementation in a randomised controlled trial. Strategies to optimise successful implementation of 6-PACK were also sought. A mixed-methods approach was applied in 24 acute wards from 6 Australian hospitals. Participants were nurses working on participating wards and senior hospital staff including Nurse Unit Managers; senior physicians; Directors of Nursing; and senior personnel involved in quality and safety or falls prevention. Information on barriers and enablers of 6-PACK implementation was obtained through surveys, focus groups and interviews. Questions reflected the COM-B framework that includes three behaviour change constructs of: capability, opportunity and motivation. Focus group and interview data were analysed thematically, and survey data descriptively. The survey response rate was 60% (420/702), and 12 focus groups (n = 96 nurses) and 24 interviews with senior staff were conducted. Capability barriers included beliefs that falls could not be prevented; and limited knowledge on falls prevention in patients with complex care needs (e.g. cognitive impairment). Capability enablers included education and training, particularly face to face case study based approaches. Lack of resources was identified as an opportunity barrier. Leadership, champions and using data to drive practice change were recognised as opportunity enablers. Motivation barriers included complacency and lack of ownership in falls prevention efforts. Motivation enablers included senior staff articulating clear goals and a commitment to falls prevention; and use of reminders, audits and feedback. The information gained from this study suggests that regular practical face-to-face education and training for nurses; provision of equipment; audit, reminders and feedback; leadership and champions; and the provision of falls data is key to successful falls prevention program implementation in acute hospitals.

Development of an implementation plan for the 6-PACK falls prevention programme as part of a randomised controlled trial: protocol for a series of preimplementation studies

Background Inhospital falls cause morbidity, staff burden and increased healthcare costs. It is unclear if the persistent problem of inhospital falls is due to the use of ineffective interventions or their suboptimal implementation. The 6-PACK programme appears to reduce fall injuries and a randomised controlled trial (RCT) was undertaken to confirm effects. This paper describes the protocol for the preimplementation studies that aimed to identify moderators of the effective use of the 6-PACK programme to inform the development of an implementation plan to be applied in the RCT. Methods The 6-PACK project included five preimplementation studies: (1) a profile of safety climate; (2) review of current falls prevention practice; (3) epidemiology of inhospital falls; (4) acceptability of the 6-PACK programme; and (5) barriers and enablers to implementation of the 6-PACK programme. The Theoretical Domain Framework that includes 12 behaviour change domains informed the design of these studies that involved 540 staff and 8877 patients from 24 wards from six Australian hospitals. Qualitative and quantitative methods were applied with data collected via: structured bedside observation; daily nurse unit manager verbal report of falls; audit of medical records, incident reporting and hospital administrative data; surveys of ward nurses; focus groups with ward nurses; and key informant interviews with senior staff. Discussion Information on contextual, system, intervention, patient and provider level factors is critical to the development of an implementation plan. Information gained from these studies was used to develop a plan applied in the RCT that addressed the barriers and harnessed enablers. Trial registration number The RCT is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12611000332921.

Acceptability of the 6-PACK falls prevention program: A pre-implementation study in hospitals participating in a cluster randomized controlled trial

There is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions in the acute hospital setting. The 6-PACK falls prevention program includes a fall-risk tool; ‘falls alert’ signs; supervision of patients in the bathroom; ensuring patients’ walking aids are within reach; toileting regimes; low-low beds; and bed/chair alarms. This study explored the acceptability of the 6-PACK program from the perspective of nurses and senior staff prior to its implementation in a randomised controlled trial. A mixed-methods approach was applied involving 24 acute wards from six Australian hospitals. Participants were nurses working on participating wards and senior hospital staff including: Nurse Unit Managers; senior physicians; Directors of Nursing; and senior personnel involved in quality and safety or falls prevention. Information on program acceptability (suitability, practicality and benefits) was obtained by surveys, focus groups and interviews. Survey data were analysed descriptively, and focus group and interview data thematically. The survey response rate was 60%. Twelve focus groups (n = 96 nurses) and 24 interviews with senior staff were conducted. Falls were identified as a priority patient safety issue and nurses as key players in falls prevention. The 6-PACK program was perceived to offer practical benefits compared to current practice. Nurses agreed fall-risk tools, low-low beds and alert signs were useful for preventing falls (>70%). Views were mixed regarding positioning patients’ walking aid within reach. Practical issues raised included access to equipment; and risk of staff injury with low-low bed use. Bathroom supervision was seen to be beneficial, however not always practical. Views on the program appropriateness and benefits were consistent across nurses and senior staff. Staff perceived the 6-PACK program as suitable, practical and beneficial, and were open to adopting the program. Some practical concerns were raised highlighting issues to be addressed by the implementation plan.

RESPOND: a patient-centred programme to prevent secondary falls in older people presenting to the emergency department with a fall-protocol for a mixed methods programme evaluation

Background Programme evaluations conducted alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have potential to enhance understanding of trial outcomes. This paper describes a multi-level programme evaluation to be conducted alongside an RCT of a falls prevention programme (RESPOND). Objectives (1) To conduct a process evaluation in order to identify the degree of implementation fidelity and associated barriers and facilitators. (2) To evaluate the primary intended impact of the programme: participation in fall prevention strategies and the factors influencing participation. (3) To identify the factors influencing RESPOND RCT outcomes: falls, fall injuries and emergency department (ED) re-presentations. Methods/design 528 community-dwelling adults aged 60–90 years presenting to two EDs with a fall will be recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention or standard care group. All RESPOND participants and RESPOND clinicians will be included in the evaluation. A mixed methods design will be used and a programme logic model will frame the evaluation. Data will be sourced from interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, clinician case notes, recruitment records, participant-completed calendars, hospital administrative datasets and audio-recordings of intervention contacts. Quantitative data will be analysed via descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative data will be interpreted using thematic analysis. Discussion The RESPOND programme evaluation will provide information about contextual and influencing factors related to the RESPOND RCT outcomes. The results will assist researchers, clinicians and policy makers regarding decisions about future falls prevention interventions. Insights gained may be applicable to a range of chronic conditions where similar preventive intervention approaches are indicated. Trial registration number This programme evaluation is linked to the RESPOND RCT which is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12614000336684).

Cambodian-born individuals diagnosed with HIV in Victoria: epidemiological findings and health service implications

AThe Macfarlane Burnet Institute for Medical Research and Public Health, Melbourne, Vic. 3001, Australia. BMonash Medical Centre, Infectious Diseases Department, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia. CDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Vic. 3004, Australia. DDepartment of Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia. ECorresponding author. Email: dayton@unimelb.edu.au

Do patients have a say? A narrative review of the development of patient-reported outcome measures used in elective procedures for coronary revascularisation

PurposePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient’s perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives.MethodsPROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development.Results24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text.ConclusionsOnly nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient’s perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs.

Exploring patient-reported outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention: A qualitative study

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a common cardiac procedure used to treat obstructive coronary artery disease. Patient‐centred care is a priority in cardiovascular health having been shown to increase patient satisfaction, engagement with rehabilitation activities and reduce anxiety. Evidence indicates that patient‐centred care is best achieved by routine collection of patient‐reported outcomes (PROs). However, existing patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) have limited the patient involvement in their development.