Understanding the diversity and dynamics of living with diabetes : a feasibility study focusing on the case

Despite growing evidence about treatments, many people living with diabetes have poor diabetes control even when healthcare is available. One difficult issue is how to apply medical evidence to individuals. This feasibility study explores change over time and the diversity of pathways to similar health outcomes, to understand how evidence can be tailored to the individual. Six people living with diabetes (two with type 1, and four with type 2) agreed to a series of interviews and diary-keeping. Reading the dataset for each individual reveals a person changing over time through interactions with people and their context. Identifying time as a theme is difficult, as it is ubiquitous. Outcome means little to those living with diabetes: they are living on through time. We developed attributes for each participant relevant to diabetes outcome, describing how they related to others and their environment, capturing emergent properties rather than detail. A similar health outcome could be achieved very differently. Comparison of patterns of attributes may be useful. However, the dynamic, relational nature of the attributes is easily lost from view. How people function in terms of time, change and interaction may be most important for tailoring interventions for improved health outcome

An implementation science study to enhance cardiovascular disease prevention in Mukono and Buikwe districts in Uganda: a stepped-wedge design

Background Uganda is experiencing a shift in major causes of death with cases of stroke, heart attack, and heart failure reportedly on the rise. In a study in Mukono and Buikwe in Uganda, more than one in four adults were reportedly hypertensive. Moreover, very few (36.5%) reported to have ever had a blood pressure measurement. The rising burden of CVD is compounded by a lack of integrated primary health care for early detection and treatment of people with increased risk. Many people have less access to effective and equitable health care services which respond to their needs. Capacity gaps in human resources, equipment, and drug supply, and laboratory capabilities are evident. Prevention of risk factors for CVD and provision of effective and affordable treatment to those who require it prevent disability and death and improve quality of life. The aim of this study is to improve health profiles for people with intermediate and high risk factors for CVD at the community and health facility levels. The implementation process and effectiveness of interventions will be evaluated. Methods The overall study is a type 2-hybrid stepped-wedge (SW) design. The design employs mixed methods evaluations with incremental execution and adaptation. Sequential crossover take place from control to intervention until all are exposed. The study will take place in Mukono and Buikwe districts in Uganda, home to more than 1,000,000 people at the community and primary healthcare facility levels. The study evaluation will be guided by; 1) RE-AIM an evaluation framework and 2) the CFIR a determinant framework. The primary outcomes are implementation – acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, coverage, and sustainability. Discussion The study is envisioned to provide important insight into barriers and facilitators of scaling up CVD prevention in a low income context. This project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN15848572. The trial was first registered on 03/01/2019

Engaging GPs in insulin therapy initiation : a qualitative study evaluating a support program in the Belgian context

Background: A program supporting the initiation of insulin therapy in primary care was introduced in Belgium, as part of a larger quality improvement project on diabetes care. This paper reports on a study exploring factors influencing the engagement of general practitioners (GPs) in insulin therapy initiation (research question 1) and exploring factors relevant for future program development (research question 2). Methods: We have used semi-structured interviews to answer the first research question: two focus group interviews with GPs who had at least one patient in the insulin initiation program and 20 one-to-one interviews with GPs who were not regular users of the overall support program in the region. To explore factors relevant for future program development, the data from the GPs were triangulated with data obtained from individual interviews with patients (n=10), the diabetes nurse educator (DNE) and the specialist involved in the program, and data extracted from meeting reports evaluating the insulin initiation support program. Results: We found differences between GPs engaged and those not engaged in insulin initiation in attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control regarding insulin initiation. In general the support program was evaluated in a positive way by users of the program. Some aspects need further consideration: job boundaries between the DNE and GPs, job boundaries between GPs and specialists, protocol adherence and limited case load. Conclusion: The study shows that the transition of insulin initiation from secondary care to the primary care setting is a challenge. Although a support program addressing known barriers to insulin initiation was provided, a substantial number of GPs were reluctant to engage in this aspect of care. Important issues for future program development are: an interdisciplinary approach to job clarification, a dynamic approach to the integration of expertise in primary care and feedback on protocol adherence. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT0082449

Translational Medicine and Patient Safety in Europe:TRANSFoRm - Architecture for the Learning Health System in Europe

The Learning Health System (LHS) describes linking routine healthcare systems directly with both research translation and knowledge translation as an extension of the evidence-based medicine paradigm, taking advantage of the ubiquitous use of electronic health record (EHR) systems. TRANSFoRm is an EU FP7 project that seeks to develop an infrastructure for the LHS in European primary care. Methods. The project is based on three clinical use cases, a genotype-phenotype study in diabetes, a randomised controlled trial with gastroesophageal reflux disease, and a diagnostic decision support system for chest pain, abdominal pain, and shortness of breath. Results. Four models were developed (clinical research, clinical data, provenance, and diagnosis) that form the basis of the projects approach to interoperability. These models are maintained as ontologies with binding of terms to define precise data elements. CDISC ODM and SDM standards are extended using an archetype approach to enable a two-level model of individual data elements, representing both research content and clinical content. Separate configurations of the TRANSFoRm tools serve each use case. Conclusions. The project has been successful in using ontologies and archetypes to develop a highly flexible solution to the problem of heterogeneity of data sources presented by the LHS

Why do GPs hesitate to refer diabetes patients to a self-management education program: a qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Self-management support is seen as a cornerstone of good diabetes care and many countries are currently engaged in initiatives to integrate self-management support in primary care. Concerning the organisation of these programs, evidence is growing that engagement of health care professionals, in particular of GPs, is critical for successful application. This paper reports on a study exploring why a substantial number of GPs was (initially) reluctant to refer patients to a self-management education program in Belgium.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Qualitative analysis of semi-structured face-to-face interviews with a purposive sample of 20 GPs who were not regular users of the service. The Greenhalgh diffusion of innovation framework was used as background and organising framework.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Several barriers, linked to different components of the Greenhalgh model, emerged from the interview data. One of the most striking ones was the limited readiness for innovation among GPs. Feelings of fear of further fragmentation of diabetes care and frustration and insecurity regarding their own role in diabetes care prevented them from engaging in the innovation process. GPs needed time to be reassured that the program respects their role and has an added value to usual care. Once GPs considered referring patients, it was not clear enough which of their patients would benefit from the program. Some GPs expressed the need for training in motivational skills, so that they could better motivate their patients to participate. A practical but often mentioned barrier was the distance to the centre where the program was delivered. Further, uncertainty about continuity interfered with the uptake of the offer.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The study results contribute to a better understanding of the reasons why GPs hesitate to refer patients to a self-management education program. First of all, the role of GPs and other health care providers in diabetes care needs to be clarified before introducing new functions. Feelings of security and a basic trust of providers in the health system are a prerequisite for participation in care innovation. Moreover, some important lessons regarding the implementation of an education program in primary care have been learned from the study.</p

E-prescription : experiences of general practitioners and pharmacists in Flanders

Background: "This work was supported by TD COST Action TD1405 - European Network for the Joint Evaluation of Connected Health Technologies” (ENJECT)" Electronic prescriptions (e-prescriptions) are expected to prevent multiple problems regarding medication admission. It aims to facilitate and prevent errors with dispensing; and improve patient’s safety through medication monitoring and alert for interactions or adverse drug reactions; etc. In 2018, e-prescription will be mandatory in Belgium for GP’s. Research questions: How does this e-prescription system affect the daily operability of both general practitioners and pharmacists? What are the main issues of this new system and how can they be improved? Method: An initial internet-based survey was executed. This questionnaire was distributed by the main software providers for both GP’s and pharmacists. Both professions received a questionnaire with slight alterations, more specified to their occupation. These results will be gathered anonymously and processed. An identical study will be running in Malta at the same time, allowing both teams to analyze each other’s results. After the gathering of these results, interviews will be held with both GP’s and pharmacists to make an in-depth analysis of issues met with daily use of the e-prescription software. Results: Our results will be available in March 2018. Strengths of our study include: results are based on a fully operational e-Prescription system that is in nationwide use. Perspectives of both GP’s and pharmacists will be taken into account as both beginning and end of the prescription chain. Experiences will be based on the daily use of the e-prescriptions. Quality control will be performed in cooperation with a team from Malta. Weaknesses include: results will be based on self-reports and might be either over- or underestimations. Our response rate might be either a strength or weakness. Conclusions: E-prescribing is present in both GP practices as in pharmacies. While the system aims to provide security and efficiency, both professions still experience problems in daily usage. Points for discussion: Advantages and disadvantages of government supported versus private supported e-presciption systems Are we getting to dependent on computers for medical practice with all technology advancements provided? Is e-prescription a concept to be expanded over different countries supporting the same/compatible system?peer-reviewe

A community health worker led approach to cardiovascular disease prevention in the UK—SPICES-Sussex (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and Sub-saharan Africa): an implementation research project

BackgroundThis paper describes a UK-based study, SPICES-Sussex, which aimed to co-produce and implement a community-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment and reduction intervention to support under-served populations at moderate risk of CVD. The objectives were to enhance stakeholder engagement; to implement the intervention in four research sites and to evaluate the use of Voluntary and Community and Social Enterprises (VCSE) and Community Health Worker (CHW) partnerships in health interventions.MethodsA type three hybrid implementation study design was used with mixed methods data. This paper represents the process evaluation of the implementation of the SPICES-Sussex Project. The evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework.ResultsReach: 381 individuals took part in the risk profiling questionnaire and forty-one women, and five men participated in the coaching intervention. Effectiveness: quantitative results from intervention participants showed significant improvements in CVD behavioural risk factors across several measures. Qualitative data indicated high acceptability, with the holistic, personalised, and person-centred approach being valued by participants. Adoption: 50% of VCSEs approached took part in the SPICES programme, The CHWs felt empowered to deliver high-quality and mutually beneficial coaching within a strong project infrastructure that made use of VCSE partnerships. Implementation: Co-design meetings resulted in local adaptations being made to the intervention. 29 (63%) of participants completed the intervention. Practical issues concerned how to embed CHWs in a health service context, how to keep engaging participants, and tensions between research integrity and the needs and expectations of those in the voluntary sector. Maintenance: Several VCSEs expressed an interest in continuing the intervention after the end of the SPICES programme.ConclusionCommunity-engagement approaches have the potential to have positively impact the health and wellbeing of certain groups. Furthermore, VCSEs and CHWs represent a significant untapped resource in the UK. However, more work needs to be done to understand how links between the sectors can be bridged to deliver evidence-based effective alternative preventative healthcare. Reaching vulnerable populations remains a challenge despite partnerships with VCSEs which are embedded in the community. By showing what went well and what did not, this project can guide future work in community engagement for health

Implementation of a program for type 2 diabetes based on the Chronic Care Model in a hospital-centered health care system: "the Belgian experience"

Background: Most research publications on Chronic Care Model (CCM) implementation originate from organizations or countries with a well-structured primary health care system. Information about efforts made in countries with a less well-organized primary health care system is scarce. In 2003, the Belgian National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance commissioned a pilot study to explore how care for type 2 diabetes patients could be organized in a more efficient way in the Belgian healthcare setting, a setting where the organisational framework for chronic care is mainly hospital-centered. Methods: Process evaluation of an action research project (2003-2007) guided by the CCM in a well-defined geographical area with 76,826 inhabitants and an estimated number of 2,300 type 2 diabetes patients. In consultation with the region a program for type 2 diabetes patients was developed. The degree of implementation of the CCM in the region was assessed using the Assessment of Chronic Illness Care survey (ACIC). A multimethod approach was used to evaluate the implementation process. The resulting data were triangulated in order to identify the main facilitators and barriers encountered during the implementation process. Results: The overall ACIC score improved from 1.45 (limited support) at the start of the study to 5.5 (basic support) at the end of the study. The establishment of a local steering group and the appointment of a program manager were crucial steps in strengthening primary care. The willingness of a group of well-trained and motivated care providers to invest in quality improvement was an important facilitator. Important barriers were the complexity of the intervention, the lack of quality data, inadequate information technology support, the lack of commitment procedures and the uncertainty about sustainable funding. Conclusion: Guided by the CCM, this study highlights the opportunities and the bottlenecks for adapting chronic care delivery in a primary care system with limited structure. The study succeeded in achieving a considerable improvement of the overall support for diabetes patients but further improvement requires a shift towards system thinking among policy makers. Currently primary care providers lack the opportunities to take up full responsibility for chronic care