Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard.


Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care | 2012

Reasons for not reporting patient safety incidents in general practice: A qualitative study

Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard; Anne Sofie Kjær Joensen; Thorkil Thorsen

Abstract Objective. To explore the reasons for not reporting patient safety incidents in general practice. Design. Qualitative interviews with general practitioners and members of the project group. Setting. General practice clinics in the Region of Northern Jutland in Denmark. Subjects. Twelve general practitioners. Main outcome measures. The experiences and reflections of the involved professionals with regard to system use and non-use. Results. While most respondents were initially positive towards the idea of reporting and learning from patient safety incidents, they actually reported very few incidents. The major reasons for the low reporting rates are found to be a perceived lack of practical usefulness, issues of time and effort in a busy clinic with competing priorities, and considerations of appropriateness in relation to other professionals. Conclusion. The results suggest that the visions of formal, comprehensive, and systematic reporting of (and learning from) patient safety incidents will be quite difficult to realize in general practice. Future studies should investigate how various ways of organizing incident reporting at the regional level influence local activities of reporting and learning in general practice.


Implementation Science | 2016

Enablers and barriers to implementing collaborative care for anxiety and depression: a systematic qualitative review

Gritt Overbeck; Annette Sofie Davidsen; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard

BackgroundCollaborative care is an increasingly popular approach for improving quality of care for people with mental health problems through an intensified and structured collaboration between primary care providers and health professionals with specialized psychiatric expertise. Trials have shown significant positive effects for patients suffering from depression, but since collaborative care is a complex intervention, it is important to understand the factors which affect its implementation. We present a qualitative systematic review of the enablers and barriers to implementing collaborative care for patients with anxiety and depression.MethodsWe developed a comprehensive search strategy in cooperation with a research librarian and performed a search in five databases (EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO, ProQuest, and CINAHL). All authors independently screened titles and abstracts and reviewed full-text articles. Studies were included if they were published in English and based on the original qualitative data on the implementation of a collaborative care intervention targeted at depression or anxiety in an adult patient population in a high-income country. Our subsequent analysis employed the normalization process theory (NPT).ResultsWe included 17 studies in our review of which 11 were conducted in the USA, five in the UK, and one in Canada. We identified several barriers and enablers within the four major analytical dimensions of NPT. Securing buy-in among primary care providers was found to be critical but sometimes difficult. Enablers included physician champions, reimbursement for extra work, and feedback on the effectiveness of collaborative care. The social and professional skills of the care managers seemed critical for integrating collaborative care in the primary health care clinic. Day-to-day implementation was also found to be facilitated by the care managers being located in the clinic since this supports regular face-to-face interactions between physicians and care managers.ConclusionsThe following areas require special attention when planning collaborative care interventions: effective educational programs, especially for care managers; issues of reimbursement in relation to primary care providers; good systems for communication and monitoring; and promoting face-to-face interaction between care managers and physicians, preferably through co-location. There is a need for well-sampled, in-depth qualitative studies on the implementation of collaborative care in settings outside the USA and the UK.


BMC Family Practice | 2015

The challenges of boundary spanners in supporting inter-organizational collaboration in primary care – a qualitative study of general practitioners in a new role

Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard; Anne Sofie Kjær Joensen; Thorkil Thorsen

BackgroundThe visions of more integrated care have created new roles and accountabilities for organizations and professionals. Thus, professionals are increasingly expected to engage in boundary spanning activities in order to facilitate inter-organizational and inter-sectoral collaboration. However, this task can be difficult for individual actors and it is important to investigate the work and challenges of boundary spanners in various settings. This study explores the challenges related to a new boundary spanning role for general practitioners employed to facilitate collaboration between the municipalities and general practice.MethodsThe study is based on semi-structured interviews with ten general practitioners acting as municipal practice consultants in the Capital Region of Denmark. The transcribed interviews were analyzed in several steps organizing the material into a set of coherent and distinct categories covering the different types of challenges experienced by the informants.ResultsThe main challenges of the general practitioners acting as boundary spanners were: 1) defining and negotiating the role in terms of tasks and competencies; 2) representing and mobilizing colleagues in general practice; 3) navigating in an unfamiliar organizational context.ConclusionsThe results support previous studies in emphasizing the difficult and multifaceted character of the boundary spanning role. While some of these challenges are not easily dealt with due to their structural causes, organizations employing boundary spanners should take note of these challenges and support their boundary spanners with matching resources and competencies.


BMC Family Practice | 2014

The effectiveness of a semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention to optimise chronic care management in general practice: a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial

Tina Drud Due; Thorkil Thorsen; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard; Volkert Siersma; Frans Boch Waldorff

BackgroundThe Danish health care sector is reorganising based on disease management programmes designed to secure integrated and high quality chronic care across hospitals, general practitioners and municipalities. The disease management programmes assign a central role to general practice; and in the Capital Region of Denmark a facilitator-based intervention was undertaken to support the implementation of the programmes in general practice. The purpose of the study was to assess the effectiveness of this semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention.MethodThe study was a stepped-wedge, randomised, controlled trial among general practices in the Capital Region of Denmark. The intervention group was offered three one-hour visits by a facilitator. The intervention was semi-tailored to the perceived needs as defined by each general practice, and the practices could choose from a list of possible topics. The control group was a delayed intervention group. The primary outcome was change in the number of annual chronic disease check-ups. Secondary outcomes were: changes in the number of annual check-ups for type 2 diabetes (DM2) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); changes in the number of spirometry tests, changes in the use of ICPC diagnosis coding and patient stratification; sign-up for a software program for patient overview; and reduction in number of practices with few annual chronic disease check-ups.ResultsWe randomised 189 general practices: 96 practices were allocated to the intervention group and 93 to the delayed intervention group. For the primary outcome, 94 and 89 practices were analysed. Almost every outcome improved from baseline to follow-up in both allocation groups. At follow-up there was no difference between allocation groups for the primary outcome (p = 0.1639). However, some secondary outcomes favoured the intervention: a higher reported use of ICPC diagnosis coding for DM2 and COPD (p = 0.0050, p = 0.0243 respectively), stratification for COPD (p = 0.0185) and a faster initial sign-up rate for the software program.ConclusionThe mixed results from this study indicate that a semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention of relatively low intensity is unlikely to add substantially to the implementation of disease management programmes for DM2 and COPD in a context marked by important concurrent initiatives (including financial incentives and mandatory registry participation) aimed at moving all practices towards changes in chronic care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01297075


Implementation Science | 2013

The effectiveness of computer reminders for improving quality assessment for point-of-care testing in general practice—a randomized controlled trial

Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard; Volkert Siersma; Susanne Reventlow; Ruth Kirk Ertmann; Peter Felding; Frans Boch Waldorff

BackgroundComputer reminders are increasingly being applied in efforts to improve quality and patient safety. However, research is still needed to establish the effectiveness of different kinds of reminders in various settings. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of computer reminders for improving adherence to a quality assessment scheme for point-of-care testing in general practice.MethodThe study was conducted as a randomized controlled crossover trial among general practices in the Capital Region of Denmark. The intervention consisted of sending computer reminders (ComRem) to practices not adhering to the guideline recommendations of split testing for hemoglobin and glucose. Practices were randomly allocated into two groups. During the first follow-up period, one of the groups received the ComRem intervention together with the general implementation activities (GIA), while the other group only received the GIA. For the second follow-up period, the intervention was switched between the two groups. Outcomes were measured as split test procedure adherence.ResultsA total of 142 practices were randomly allocated to the early intervention group and 144 practices to the late intervention group (the control group in the first follow-up period). In the first intervention period, the mean number of split tests performed in the group receiving ComRem group increased from 1.22 to 3.76 (out of eight possible tests) while the mean number of split tests increased from 1.11 to 2.35 in the group targeted by GIA only (p = 0.0059). After the crossover, a similar effect of reminders was observed. Furthermore, the developments in outcome measures over time showed a strong effect of computer reminders beyond the intervention periods.ConclusionThere was a significant effect of computer reminders on adherence to the quality assessment scheme for point-of-care testing. Thus, computer reminders seem to be useful for supporting the implementation of relatively simple procedures for quality and safety.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: http://NCT01152177


BMC Health Services Research | 2018

Exploring drivers and challenges in implementation of health promotion in community mental health services: a qualitative multi-site case study using Normalization Process Theory

Viola Burau; Kathrine Carstensen; Mia Fredens; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard

BackgroundThere is an increased interest in improving the physical health of people with mental illness. Little is known about implementing health promotion interventions in adult mental health organisations where many users also have physical health problems. The literature suggests that contextual factors are important for implementation in community settings. This study focused on the change process and analysed the implementation of a structural health promotion intervention in community mental health organisations in different contexts in Denmark.MethodsThe study was based on a qualitative multiple-case design and included two municipal and two regional provider organisations. Data were various written sources and 13 semi-structured interviews with 22 key managers and frontline staff. The analysis was organised around the four main constructs of Normalization Process Theory: Coherence, Cognitive Participation, Collective Action, and Reflexive Monitoring.ResultsCoherence: Most respondents found the intervention to be meaningful in that the intervention fitted well into existing goals, practices and treatment approaches. Cognitive Participation: Management engagement varied across providers and low engagement impeded implementation. Engaging all staff was a general problem although some of the initial resistance was apparently overcome. Collective Action: Daily enactment depended on staff being attentive and flexible enough to manage the complex needs and varying capacities of users. Reflexive Monitoring: During implementation, staff evaluations of the progress and impact of the intervention were mostly informal and ad hoc and staff used these to make on-going adjustments to activities. Overall, characteristics of context common to all providers (work force and user groups) seemed to be more important for implementation than differences in the external political-administrative context.ConclusionsIn terms of research, future studies should adopt a more bottom-up, grounded description of context and pay closer attention to the interplay between different dimensions of implementation. In terms of practice, future interventions need to better facilitate the translation of the initial sense of general meaning into daily practice by active local management support that occurs throughout the implementation process and that systematically connects the intervention to existing practices.


Health | 2017

The uses and implications of standards in general practice consultations.

Maria Laura Lippert; Susanne Reventlow; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard

Quality standards play an increasingly important role in primary care through their inscription in various technologies for improving professional practice. While ‘hard’ biomedical standards have been the most common and debated, current quality development initiatives increasingly seek to include standards for the ‘softer’ aspects of care. This article explores the consequences of both kinds of quality standards for chronic care consultations. The article presents findings from an explorative qualitative field study in Danish general practice where a standardized technology for quality development has been introduced. Data from semi-structured interviews and observations among 17 general practitioners were analysed using an iterative analytical approach, which served to identify important variations in the uses and impacts of the technology. The most pronounced impact of the technology was observed among general practitioners who strictly adhered to the procedural standards on the interactional aspects of care. Thus, when allowed to function as an overall frame for consultations, those standards supported adherence to general recommendations regarding which elements to be included in chronic disease consultations. However, at the same time, adherence to those standards was observed to narrow the focus of doctor–patient dialogues and to divert general practitioners’ attention from patients’ personal concerns. Similar consequences of quality standards have previously been framed as manifestations of an inherent conflict between principles of patient-centredness and formal biomedical quality standards. However, this study suggests that standards on the ‘softer’ aspects of care may just as well interfere with a clinical approach relying on situated and attentive interactions with patients.


BMC Health Services Research | 2016

Organising medication discontinuation: a qualitative study exploring the views of general practitioners toward discontinuing statins.

Michael Simon Nixon; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard

BackgroundDiscontinuing medications is a complex decision making process and an important medical practice. It is a tool in reducing polypharmacy, reducing health system expenditure and improving patient quality of life. Few studies have looked at how general practitioners (GPs) discontinue a medication, in agreement with the patients, from a professional perspective. Three research questions were examined in this study: when does medication discontinuation occur in general practice, how is discontinuing medication handled in the GP’s practice and how do GPs make decisions about discontinuing medication?MethodsTwenty four GPs were interviewed using a maximum variation sample strategy. Participant observations were done in three general practices, for one day each, totalling approximately 30 consultations.ResultsThe results show that different discontinuation cues (related to the type of consultation, medical records and the patient) create situations of dissonance that can lead to the GP considering the option of discontinuation. We also show that there is a lot of ambiguity in situations of discontinuing and that some GPs trialled discontinuing as means of generating more information that could be used to deal with the ambiguity.ConclusionsWe conclude that the practice of discontinuation should be conceptualised as a continually evaluative process and one that requires sustained reflection through a culture of systematically scheduled check-ups, routinely eliciting the patient’s experience of taking drugs and trialling discontinuation. Some policy recommendations are offered including supporting GPs with lists or handbooks that directly address discontinuation and by developing more person centred clinical guidelines that discuss discontinuation more explicitly.


Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice | 2015

The effectiveness of computer reminders versus postal reminders for improving quality assessment for point-of-care testing in primary care: a randomized controlled trial

Volkert Siersma; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard; Susanne Reventlow; Ruth Kirk Ertmann; Peter Felding; Frans Boch Waldorff

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES This study aimed to evaluate the relative effectiveness of electronic and postal reminders for increasing adherence to the quality assurance programme for the international normalized ratio (INR) point-of-care testing (POCT) device in primary care. METHODS All 213 family practices that use the Elective Laboratory of the Capital Region, Denmark, and regularly conduct INR POCT were randomly allocated into two similarly sized groups. During the 4-month intervention, these practices were sent either computer reminders (ComRem) or computer-generated postal reminders (Postal) if they did not perform a split test to check the quality of their INR POCT for each calendar month. The adherence of the practices was tracked during the subsequent 8 months subdivided into two 4-month periods both without intervention. Outcomes were measures of split test procedure adherence. RESULTS Both interventions were associated with an increase in adherence to the split test procedure - a factor 6.00 [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.46-7.72] and 8.22 [95% CI 5.87-11.52] for ComRem and Postal, respectively - but there is no evidence that one of the interventions was more effective than the other. In the ComRem group, the expected number of split tests (out of four) was 2.54 (95% CI 2.33-2.76) versus 2.44 (95% CI 2.24-2.65) in the Postal group, P = 0.14. There was a slight decrease in adherence over the two follow-ups, but neither intervention was better than the other in achieving a lasting improvement in adherence. CONCLUSION Computer reminders are as efficient as postal reminders in increasing adherence to a quality assurance programme for the INR POCT device in primary care.


BMC Health Services Research | 2017

Role enactment of facilitation in primary care: a qualitative study

Tina Drud Due; Thorkil Thorsen; Frans Boch Waldorff; Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard

BackgroundFacilitation is a widely used implementation method in quality improvement. Reviews reveal a variety of understandings of facilitation and facilitator roles. Research suggests that facilitation interventions should be flexible and tailored to the needs and circumstances of the receiving organisations. The complexity of the facilitation field and diversity of potential facilitator roles fosters a need to investigate in detail how facilitation is enacted. Hence, the purpose of this study was to explore the enactment of external peer facilitation in general practice in order to create a stronger basis for discussing and refining facilitation as an implementation method.MethodsThe facilitation intervention under study was conducted in general practice in the Capital Region of Denmark in order to support an overall strategy for implementing chronic disease management programmes. We observed 30 facilitation visits in 13 practice settings and had interviews and focus groups with facilitators. We applied an explorative approach in data collection and analysis, and conducted an inductive thematic analysis.ResultsThe facilitators mainly enacted four facilitator roles: teacher, super user, peer and process manager. Thus, apart from trying to keep the process structured and focused the facilitators were engaged in didactic presentations and hands-on learning as they tried to pass on factual information and experienced based knowledge as well as their own enthusiasm towards implementing practice changes. While occasional challenges were observed with enacting these roles, more importantly we found that a coaching based role which was also envisioned in the intervention design was only sparsely enacted meaning that the facilitators did not enable substantial internal group discussions during their facilitation visits.ConclusionFacilitation is a complex phenomenon both conceptually and in practice. This study complements existing research by showing how facilitation can be enacted in various ways and by suggesting that some facilitator roles are more likely to be enacted than others, depending on the context and intervention design and the professional background of the facilitators. This complexity requires caution when comparing and evaluating facilitation studies and highlights a need for precision and clarity about goals, roles, and competences when designing, conducting, and reporting facilitation interventions.

Collaboration


Dive into the Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Frans Boch Waldorff

University of Southern Denmark

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Tina Drud Due

University of Copenhagen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Gritt Overbeck

University of Copenhagen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge