A stakeholder co-design approach for developing a community pharmacy service to enhance screening and management of atrial fibrillation

The authors would like to thank all participants in this research for their valuable input into the co-design process.Background: Community pharmacies provide a suitable setting to promote self-screening programs aimed at enhancing the early detection of atrial fibrillation (AF). Developing and implementing novel community pharmacy services (CPSs) is a complex and acknowledged challenge, which requires comprehensive planning and the participation of relevant stakeholders. Co-design processes are participatory research approaches that can enhance the development, evaluation and implementation of health services. The aim of this study was to co-design a pharmacist-led CPS aimed at enhancing self-monitoring/screening of AF. Methods: A 3-step co-design process was conducted using qualitative methods: (1) interviews and focus group with potential service users (n = 8) to identify key needs and concerns; (2) focus group with a mixed group of stakeholders (n = 8) to generate a preliminary model of the service; and (3) focus group with community pharmacy owners and managers (n = 4) to explore the feasibility and appropriateness of the model. Data were analysed qualitatively to identify themes and intersections between themes. The JeMa2 model to conceptualize pharmacybased health programs was used to build a theoretical model of the service. Results: Stakeholders delineated: a clear target population (i.e., individuals ≥65 years old, with hypertension, with or without previous AF or stroke); the components of the service (i.e., patient education; self-monitoring at home; results evaluation, referral and follow-up); and a set of circumstances that may influence the implementation of the service (e.g., quality of the service, competency of the pharmacist, inter-professional relationships, etc.). A number of strategies were recommended to enable implementation (e.g.,. endorsement by leading cardiovascular organizations, appropriate communication methods and channels between the pharmacy and the general medical practice settings, etc.). Conclusion: A novel and preliminary model of a CPS aimed at enhancing the management of AF was generated from this participatory process. This model can be used to inform decision making processes aimed at adopting and piloting of the service. It is expected the co-designed service has been adapted to suit existing needs of patients and current care practices, which, in turn, may increase the feasibility and acceptance of the service when it is implemented into a real setting.This work was funded by Covidien Pty Ltd. (Medtronic Australasia Pty Ltd) [UTS Project code: PRO16–0688], which is the company that has the rights to distribute the device Microlife BP A200 AFIB in Australia. Also, funding for this research has been provided by a UTS Chancellor’s postdoctoral fellowship awarded to the first author of this article (ID number: 2013001605)

Patients’ and health professionals’ views and experiences of atrial fibrillation and oral-anticoagulant therapy:a qualitative meta-synthesis

Objective - Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are prescribed oral-anticoagulant (OAC) therapy, often warfarin, to reduce stroke risk. We explored existing qualitative evidence about patients’ and health professionals’ experiences of OAC therapy. Methods - Systematic searches of eight bibliographic databases were conducted. Quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and data from ten studies were synthesised qualitatively. Results - Four third-order constructs, emerged from the final step in the analysis process: (1) diagnosing AF and the communication of information, (2) deciding on OAC therapy, (3) challenges revolving around patient issues, and (4) healthcare challenges. Synthesis uncovered perspectives that could not be achieved through individual studies. Conclusion - Physicians’ and patients’ experiences present a dichotomy of opinion on decision-making, which requires further exploration and changes in practice. Outcomes of workload pressure on both health professionals and patients should be investigated. The need for on-going support and education to patients and physicians is critical to achieve best practice and treatment adherence. Practice implications - Such research could encourage health professionals to understand and attend better to the needs and concerns of the patient. Additionally these findings can be used to inform researchers and healthcare providers in developing educational interventions with both patients and health professionals

World Heart Federation Roadmap on Atrial Fibrillation - A 2020 Update

The World Heart Federation (WHF) commenced a Roadmap initiative in 2015 to reduce the global burden of cardiovascular disease and resultant burgeoning of healthcare costs. Roadmaps provide a blueprint for implementation of priority solutions for the principal cardiovascular diseases leading to death and disability. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of these conditions and is an increasing problem due to ageing of the world’s population and an increase in cardiovascular risk factors that predispose to AF. The goal of the AF roadmap was to provide guidance on priority interventions that are feasible in multiple countries, and to identify roadblocks and potential strategies to overcome them. Since publication of the AF Roadmap in 2017, there have been many technological advances including devices and artificial intelligence for identification and prediction of unknown AF, better methods to achieve rhythm control, and widespread uptake of smartphones and apps that could facilitate new approaches to healthcare delivery and increasing community AF awareness. In addition, the World Health Organisation added the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to the Essential Medicines List, making it possible to increase advocacy for their widespread adoption as therapy to prevent stroke. These advances motivated the WHF to commission a 2020 AF Roadmap update. Three years after the original Roadmap publication, the identified barriers and solutions were judged still relevant, and progress has been slow. This 2020 Roadmap update reviews the significant changes since 2017 and identifies priority areas for achieving the goals of reducing death and disability related to AF, particularly targeted at low-middle income countries. These include advocacy to increase appreciation of the scope of the problem; plugging gaps in guideline management and prevention through physician education, increasing patient health literacy, and novel ways to increase access to integrated healthcare including mHealth and digital transformations; and greater emphasis on achieving practical solutions to national and regional entrenched barriers. Despite the advances reviewed in this update, the task will not be easy, but the health rewards of implementing solutions that are both innovative and practical will be great

Enhancing Success of Medicare\u27s Shared Decision Making Mandates Using Implementation Science: Examples Applying the Pragmatic Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has mandated shared decision making (SDM) using patient decision aids for three conditions (lung cancer screening, atrial fibrillation, and implantable defibrillators). These forward-thinking approaches are in response to a wealth of efficacy data demonstrating that decision aids can improve patient decision making. However, there has been little focus on how to implement these approaches in real-world practice. This article demonstrates how using an implementation science framework may help programs understand multilevel challenges and opportunities to improve adherence to the CMS mandates. Using the PRISM (Pragmatic Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model) framework, we discuss general challenges to implementation of SDM, issues specific to each mandate, and how to plan for, enhance, and assess SDM implementation outcomes. Notably, a theme of this discussion is that successful implementation is context-specific and to truly have successful and sustainable changes in practice, context variability, and adaptation to context must be considered and addressed

Developing a complex educational–behavioural intervention:the TREAT intervention for patients with atrial fibrillation

This article describes the theoretical and pragmatic development of a patient-centred intervention for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Theoretical models (Common Sense Model, Necessity-Concerns Framework), clinical frameworks, and AF patient feedback contributed to the design of a one-off hour-long behaviour-change intervention package. Intervention materials consisted of a DVD, educational booklet, diary and worksheet, which were patient-centred and easy to administer. The intervention was evaluated within a randomised controlled trial. Several “active theoretical ingredients” were identified (for e.g., where patients believed their medication was less harmful they spent more time within the therapeutic range (TTR), with general harm scores predicting TTR at 6 months). Allowing for social comparison and adopting behaviour change techniques enabled accurate patient understanding of their condition and medication. The process of developing the intervention using theory-derived content and evaluation tools allowed a greater understanding of the mechanisms by which this intervention was successful. Alleviating concerns about treatment medication by educating patients can help to improve adherence. This process of intervention development could be adopted for a range of chronic illnesses and treatments. Critical elements should include the use of: (1) clinical guidelines; (2) appropriate theoretical models; (3) patient input; and (4) appropriate evaluation tools

Using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to understand adherence to multiple evidence-based indicators in primary care : a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: There are recognised gaps between evidence and practice in general practice, a setting posing particular implementation challenges. We earlier screened clinical guideline recommendations to derive a set of 'high-impact' indicators based upon criteria including potential for significant patient benefit, scope for improved practice and amenability to measurement using routinely collected data. Here, we explore health professionals' perceived determinants of adherence to these indicators, examining the degree to which determinants were indicator-specific or potentially generalisable across indicators. METHODS: We interviewed 60 general practitioners, practice nurses and practice managers in West Yorkshire, the UK, about adherence to four indicators: avoidance of risky prescribing; treatment targets in type 2 diabetes; blood pressure targets in treated hypertension; and anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Interview questions drew upon the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Data were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Professional role and identity and environmental context and resources featured prominently across all indicators whilst the importance of other domains, for example, beliefs about consequences, social influences and knowledge varied across indicators. We identified five meta-themes representing more general organisational and contextual factors common to all indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The TDF helped elicit a wide range of reported determinants of adherence to 'high-impact' indicators in primary care. It was more difficult to pinpoint which determinants, if targeted by an implementation strategy, would maximise change. The meta-themes broadly underline the need to align the design of interventions targeting general practices with higher level supports and broader contextual considerations. However, our findings suggest that it is feasible to develop interventions to promote the uptake of different evidence-based indicators which share common features whilst also including content-specific adaptations

Quality indicators as a tool in improving the introduction of new medicines

Quality indicators are increasingly used as a tool to achieve safe and quality clinical care, cost-effective therapy, for professional learning, remuneration, accreditation and financial incentives. A substantial number focus on drug therapy but few address the introduction of new medicines even though this is a burning issue. The objective was to describe the issues and challenges in designing and implementing a transparent indicator framework and evaluation protocol for the introduction of new medicines and to provide guidance on how to apply quality indicators in the managed entry of new medicines. Quality indicators need to be developed early to assess whether new medicines are introduced appropriately. A number of key factors need to be addressed when developing, applying and evaluating indicators including dimensions of quality, suggested testing protocols, potential data sources, key implementation factors such as intended and unintended consequences, budget impact and cost-effectiveness, assuring the involvement of the medical professions, patients and the public, and reliable and easy-to-use computerized tools for data collection and management. Transparent approaches include the need for any quality indicators developed to handle conflict of interests to enhance their validity and acceptance. The suggested framework and indicator testing protocol may be useful in assessing the applicability of indicators for new medicines and may be adapted to healthcare settings worldwide. The suggestions build on existing literature to create a field testing methodology that can be used to produce country-specific quality indicators for new medicines as well as a cross international approach to facilitate access to new medicines