Literature DB >> 34034761

Theory-based approach to developing an implementation plan to support the adoption of a patient decision aid for Down syndrome prenatal screening.

Titilayo Tatiana Agbadjé1,2,3, Matthew Menear1,2,3, Marie-Pierre Gagnon2,3,4, France Légaré5,6,7,8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Our team has developed a decision aid to help pregnant women and their partners make informed decisions about Down syndrome prenatal screening. However, the decision aid is not yet widely available in Quebec's prenatal care pathways.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify knowledge translation strategies and develop an implementation plan to promote the use of the decision aid in prenatal care services in Quebec, Canada.
METHODS: Guided by the Knowledge-to-Action Framework and the Theoretical Domains Framework, we performed a synthesis of our research (11 publications) on prenatal screening in Quebec and on the decision aid. Two authors independently reviewed the 11 articles, extracted information, and mapped it onto the Knowledge-to-Action framework. Using participatory action research methods, we then recruited pregnant women, health professionals, managers of three prenatal care services, and researchers to (a) identify the different clinical pathways followed by pregnant women and (b) select knowledge translation strategies for a clinical implementation plan. Then, based on all the information gathered, the authors established a consensus on strategies to include in the plan.
RESULTS: Our knowledge synthesis showed that pregnant women and their partners are not sufficiently involved in the decision-making process about prenatal screening and that there are numerous barriers and facilitators of the use of the decision aid in clinical practice (e.g., low intention to use it among health providers). Using a participatory action approach, we met with five pregnant women, three managers, and six health professionals. They informed us about three of Quebec's prenatal care pathways and helped us identify 20 knowledge translation strategies (e.g., nurse discusses decision aid with women before they meet the doctor) to include in a clinical implementation plan. The research team reached a consensus about the clinical plan and also about broader organizational strategies, such as training healthcare providers in the use of the decision aid, monitoring its impact (e.g., measure decisional conflict) and sustaining its use (e.g., engage key stakeholders in the implementation process).
CONCLUSION: Next steps are to pilot our implementation plan while further identifying global strategies that target institutional, policy, and systemic supports for implementation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision aid; IPDAS; Implementation plan; Knowledge-to-Action Framework; Participatory action research; Shared decision making; Theoretical Domains Framework

Year:  2021        PMID: 34034761     DOI: 10.1186/s13012-021-01103-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Implement Sci        ISSN: 1748-5908            Impact factor:   7.327


  40 in total

1.  How much do family physicians involve pregnant women in decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome?

Authors:  Susie Gagnon; Michel Labrecque; Merlin Njoya; François Rousseau; Sylvie St-Jacques; France Légaré
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  A randomized trial comparing alternative approaches to prenatal diagnosis counseling in advanced maternal age patients.

Authors:  A G W Hunter; M Cappelli; L Humphreys; J E Allanson; T T Chiu; C Peeters; D Moher; A Zimak
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.438

3.  Shared decision-making in primary care: the neglected second half of the consultation.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; P Kinnersley
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Are you SURE?: Assessing patient decisional conflict with a 4-item screening test.

Authors:  France Légaré; Stephen Kearing; Kate Clay; Susie Gagnon; Denis D'Amours; Michel Rousseau; Annette O'Connor
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  Promoting informed choice: transforming health care to dispense knowledge for decision making.

Authors:  Steven H Woolf; Evelyn C Y Chan; Russell Harris; Stacey L Sheridan; Clarence H Braddock; Robert M Kaplan; Alex Krist; Annette M O'Connor; Sean Tunis
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-08-16       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 6.  Decision aids for patients facing a surgical treatment decision: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anouk M Knops; Dink A Legemate; Astrid Goossens; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Dirk T Ubbink
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 7.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.

Authors:  France Légaré; Stéphane Ratté; Karine Gravel; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2008-08-26

8.  Understanding why decision aids work: linking process with outcome.

Authors:  Hilary L Bekker; Jenny Hewison; Jim G Thornton
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2003-07

Review 9.  Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Dominick Frosch; Richard Thomson; Natalie Joseph-Williams; Amy Lloyd; Paul Kinnersley; Emma Cording; Dave Tomson; Carole Dodd; Stephen Rollnick; Adrian Edwards; Michael Barry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Physicians' intentions and use of three patient decision aids.

Authors:  Ian D Graham; Jo Logan; Carol L Bennett; Justin Presseau; Annette M O'Connor; Susan L Mitchell; Jacqueline M Tetroe; Ann Cranney; Paul Hebert; Shawn D Aaron
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2007-07-06       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.