Literature DB >> 19906215

Conducting implementation research in community-based primary care: a qualitative study on integrating patient decision support interventions for cancer screening into routine practice.

Dominick L Frosch1, Kirsty J Singer, Stefan Timmermans.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing body of evidence supporting the efficacy of patient decision support interventions (DESI), little is known about their implementation in community-based primary care practices.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to explore the feasibility of integrating the use of DESIs for cancer screening in primary care practices serving patients from diverse backgrounds and learn more about the potential barriers and facilitators of integration.
SETTING: 12 community-based primary care practices in metropolitan Los Angeles. MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED: Qualitative field notes documented the roles played by staff and physicians in accomplishing project goals, the impact of the programmes on the clinical work-flow in the practices and other noteworthy observations.
RESULTS: Practices that were better able to integrate the project had adequate clinic infrastructure, a relatively well-matched patient pool, and positive work and patient care environments. The remaining identified components, including staff facilitation and the physician's role accounted for higher level differences between the clinics, acting as barriers and facilitators that distinguished practices that were able to work independently from those that required more assistance and, to a lesser extent, those clinics that did and those that did not meet the project goals. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that implementation of DESIs to be used immediately before a consultation is feasible if the practice infrastructure can provide sufficient basic accommodation and physician and staff are dedicated to patient care goals that are implicit in the use of these tools. Overall, the physician's role appeared to be the most important factor in determining whether project integration was successful.
© 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 19906215      PMCID: PMC5057176          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00579.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  20 in total

1.  Geography and the debate over Medicare reform.

Authors:  John E Wennberg; Elliott S Fisher; Jonathan S Skinner
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2002 Jul-Dec       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Physicians moving to mid-sized, single-specialty practices.

Authors:  Allison Liebhaber; Joy M Grossman
Journal:  Track Rep       Date:  2007-08

3.  The evaluation of two methods to facilitate shared decision making for men considering the prostate-specific antigen test.

Authors:  D L Frosch; R M Kaplan; V Felitti
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Qualitative study of evidence based leaflets in maternity care.

Authors:  Helen Stapleton; Mavis Kirkham; Gwenan Thomas
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-16

5.  Implementing shared decision-making in routine practice: barriers and opportunities.

Authors:  Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Diane Valade; Catherine Orlowski; Catherine Draus; Barbara Nabozny-Valerio; Susan Keiser
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Interventions fail to increase cancer screening rates in community-based primary care practices.

Authors:  Mack T Ruffin; Daniel W Gorenflo
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Toward the 'tipping point': decision aids and informed patient choice.

Authors:  Annette M O'Connor; John E Wennberg; France Legare; Hilary A Llewellyn-Thomas; Benjamin W Moulton; Karen R Sepucha; Andrea G Sodano; Jaime S King
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.301

8.  Cultural sensitivity and informed decision making about prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Evelyn C Y Chan; Michelle C Haynes; Frederick T O'Donnell; Carolyn Bachino; Sally W Vernon
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2003-12

9.  Effectiveness of a computerized decision aid in primary care on decision making and quality of life in menorrhagia: results of the MENTIP randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Joanne Protheroe; Peter Bower; Carolyn Chew-Graham; Tim J Peters; Tom Fahey
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2007-09-26       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  The uptake and effect of a mailed multi-modal colon cancer screening intervention: a pilot controlled trial.

Authors:  Carmen L Lewis; Alison T Brenner; Jennifer M Griffith; Michael P Pignone
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2008-06-02       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  17 in total

1.  Implementation successes and challenges in participating in a pragmatic study to improve colon cancer screening: perspectives of health center leaders.

Authors:  Gloria D Coronado; Jennifer L Schneider; Amanda Petrik; Jennifer Rivelli; Stephen Taplin; Beverly B Green
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Shared decision making: vision to reality.

Authors:  Michael Barry; Carrie Levin; Morgan MacCuaig; Al Mulley; Karen Sepucha
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Barriers and facilitators to routine distribution of patient decision support interventions: a preliminary study in community-based primary care settings.

Authors:  Visith Uy; Suepattra G May; Caroline Tietbohl; Dominick L Frosch
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-01-02       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Characterizing the Nature of Scan Results Discussions: Insights Into Why Patients Misunderstand Their Prognosis.

Authors:  Sarguni Singh; Dagoberto Cortez; Douglas Maynard; James F Cleary; Lori DuBenske; Toby C Campbell
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 3.840

5.  Effect of a Decision Aid on Access to Total Knee Replacement for Black Patients With Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Said A Ibrahim; Marissa Blum; Gwo-Chin Lee; Pekka Mooar; Elina Medvedeva; Aliya Collier; Diane Richardson
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 14.766

6.  Physicians' perspectives on the informational needs of low-risk prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Charlotte J Hagerman; Paula G Bellini; Kim M Davis; Richard M Hoffman; David S Aaronson; Daniel Y Leigh; Riley E Zinar; David Penson; Stephen Van Den Eeden; Kathryn L Taylor
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2017-04-01

7.  Facilitators and Barriers to Implementing a Digital Informed Decision Making Tool in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Nicole Puccinelli-Ortega; Mark Cromo; Kristie L Foley; Mark B Dignan; Ajay Dharod; Anna C Snavely; David P Miller
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 2.342

8.  Physicians' perceptions of shared decision-making behaviours: a qualitative study demonstrating the continued chasm between aspirations and clinical practice.

Authors:  Rachel Zeuner; Dominick L Frosch; Marie D Kuzemchak; Mary C Politi
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Patchy 'coherence': using normalization process theory to evaluate a multi-faceted shared decision making implementation program (MAGIC).

Authors:  Amy Lloyd; Natalie Joseph-Williams; Adrian Edwards; Andrew Rix; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Investigating active ingredients in a complex intervention: a nested study within the Patient and Decision Aids (PANDAs) randomised controlled trial for people with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Ian Brown; Alastair Bradley; Chirk Jenn Ng; Brigitte Colwell; Nigel Mathers
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2014-06-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.