NICEly does it: economic analysis within evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

There is increasing professional and policy interest in the role of clinical guidelines for promoting effective and efficient health care. The NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme identified an urgent need, when such guidelines are produced, to develop a framework and methods for incorporating the best evidence of effectiveness, taking into account information on cost-effectiveness. This paper describes the development of recent evidence-based guidelines, for use in primary care, which were the result of recent work by the North of England Guidelines Development Group. Their specific aim was to incorporate economic analysis into the guideline process and treatment recommendations. The introduction of economic data raised some methodological issues, specifically: in providing valid and generalisable cost estimates; in the grading of cost ‘evidence’; in finding a presentation helpful to clinicians. The approach used was to help clinicians aggregate the various attributes of treatment to make good treatment recommendations, rather than interpret cost-effectiveness ratios. In none of the guideline areas was there adequate information to estimate a cost per quality-adjusted-life-year. In the light of this research, future areas of work are identified and some recommendations are made for the forthcoming National Institute for Clinical Excellence.evidence-based medicine, economic evaluation, clinical guidelines, NICE

Statistical considerations in a systematic review of proxy measures of clinical behaviour

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Can the collective intentions of individual professionals within healthcare teams predict the team's performance : developing methods and theory

Background: Within implementation research, using theory-based approaches to understanding the behaviours of healthcare professionals and the quality of care that they reflect and designing interventions to change them is being promoted. However, such approaches lead to a new range of methodological and theoretical challenges pre-eminent among which are how to appropriately relate predictors of individual's behaviour to measures of the behaviour of healthcare professionals .The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between the theory of planned behaviour proximal predictors of behaviour (intention and perceived behavioural control, or PBC) and practice level behaviour. This was done in the context of two clinical behaviours – statin prescription and foot examination – in the management of patients with diabetes mellitus in primary care. Scores for the predictor variables were aggregated over healthcare professionals using four methods: simple mean of all primary care team members' intention scores; highest intention score combined with PBC of the highest intender in the team; highest intention score combined with the highest PBC score in the team; the scores (on both constructs) of the team member identified as having primary responsibility for the clinical behaviour. Methods: Scores on theory-based cognitive variables were collected by postal questionnaire survey from a sample of primary care doctors and nurses from northeast England and the Netherlands. Data on two clinical behaviours were patient reported, and collected by postal questionnaire survey. Planned analyses explored the predictive value of various aggregations of intention and PBC in explaining variance in the behavioural data. Results: Across the two countries and two behaviours, responses were received from 37 to 78% of healthcare professionals in 57 to 93% practices; 51% (UK) and 69% (Netherlands) of patients surveyed responded. None of the aggregations of cognitions predicted statin prescription. The highest intention in the team (irrespective of PBC) was a significant predictor of foot examination Conclusion: These approaches to aggregating individually-administered measures may be a methodological advance of theoretical importance. Using simple means of individual-level measures to explain team-level behaviours is neither theoretically plausible nor empirically supported; the highest intention was both predictive and plausible. In studies aiming to understand the behaviours of teams of healthcare professionals in managing chronic diseases, some sort of aggregation of measures from individuals is necessary. This is not simply a methodological point, but a necessary step in advancing the theoretical and practical understanding of the processes that lead to implementation of clinical behaviours within healthcare teams

Team climate and quality of care in primary health care: a review of studies using the Team Climate Inventory in the United Kingdom

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Attributes of teams could affect the quality of care delivered in primary care. The aim of this study was to systematically review studies conducted within the UK NHS primary care that have measured team climate using the Team Climate Inventory (TCI), and to describe, if reported, the relationship between the TCI and measures of quality of care.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched. The reference lists of included article were checked and one relevant journal was hand-searched. Eight papers were included. Three studies used a random sample; the remaining five used convenience or purposive samples. Six studies were cross sectional surveys, whilst two were before and after studies. Four studies examined the relationship between team climate and quality of care. Only one study found a positive association between team climate and higher quality care in patients with diabetes, positive patient satisfaction and self-reported effectiveness.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>While the TCI has been used to measure team attributes in primary care settings in the UK it is difficult to generalise from these data. A small number of studies reported higher TCI scores being associated with only certain aspects of quality of care; reasons for the pattern of association are unclear. There are a number of methodological challenges to conducting such studies in routine service settings. Further research is needed in order to understand how to measure team functioning in relation to quality of care.</p

Factors predicting team climate, and its relationship with quality of care in general practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Quality of care in general practice may be affected by the team climate perceived by its health and non-health professionals. Better team working is thought to lead to higher effectiveness and quality of care. However, there is limited evidence available on what affects team functioning and its relationship with quality of care in general practice. This study aimed to explore individual and practice factors that were associated with team climate, and to explore the relationship between team climate and quality of care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross sectional survey of a convenience sample of 14 general practices and their staff in South Tyneside in the northeast of England. Team climate was measured using the short version of Team Climate Inventory (TCI) questionnaire. Practice characteristics were collected during a structured interview with practice managers. Quality was measured using the practice Quality and Outcome Framework (QOF) scores.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>General Practitioners (GP) had a higher team climate scores compared to other professionals. Individual's gender and tenure, and number of GPs in the practice were significantly predictors of a higher team climate. There was no significant correlation between mean practice team climate scores (or subscales) with QOF scores.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The absence of a relationship between a measure of team climate and quality of care in this exploratory study may be due to a number of methodological problems. Further research is required to explore how to best measure team functioning and its relationship with quality of care.</p

Top-performing math students in 82 countries : An integrative data analysis of gender differences in achievement, achievement profiles, and achievement motivation

The present integrative data analysis examined gender differences in achievement, achievement profiles, and achievement motivation in mathematics, reading, and science among 113,864 top-performing adolescent math students (top 5% in their respective countries). To do this, we applied the same analysis protocol to representative individual participant data from six cycles of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA 2000–2015; 82 countries) and integrated the results by using meta-analytical random coefficient models. We found that in the group of top-performing math students, male students were overrepresented (mean female-to-male ratio 1:1.50, 95% CI [1:1.58, 1:1:43]). Furthermore, female students possessed better reading skills (mean d = –0.23, 95% CI [–0.25, –0.21]) and more positive reading attitudes (–0.64, 95% CI [–0.69, –0.60] ≤ mean d ≤ –0.38, 95% CI [–0.46, –0.30]). Male students had stronger math self-efficacy (mean d = 0.32, 95% CI [0.28, 0.35]) and demonstrated mathematics-oriented achievement profiles, whereas female students’ profiles were more balanced across domains. Moreover, female students were more interested in organic and medical fields (–0.44, 95% CI [–0.48, –0.40] ≤ mean d ≤ –0.30, 95% CI [–0.34, –0.25]), whereas male students showed greater interest in physics-related topics (0.39, 95% CI [0.36, 0.43] ≤ mean d ≤ 0.54, 95% CI [0.50, 0.58]). Gender equality indicators moderated the proportion of female students in the top 5% in mathematics and explained variability in achievement profiles across countries. Results are explained by social role theory and situated expectancy–value theory, and implications for women’s underrepresentation in (specific) STEM fields are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved

Requirements for ethics committee review for studies submitted to Implementation Science

The requirement for ethics review of studies submitted to Implementation Science has been unclear. Therefore, in this editorial, we set out our requirements for ethics committee review of experimental and non-experimental studies. For any study that meets the criteria of human subject research (which includes research on healthcare providers), irrespective of study design, we will require proof of either satisfactory ethics committee review or of the granting of an official exemption or waiver

The development of a theory-based intervention to promote appropriate disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia

Background: The development and description of interventions to change professional practice are often limited by the lack of an explicit theoretical and empirical basis. We set out to develop an intervention to promote appropriate disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia based on theoretical and empirical work. Methods: We identified three key disclosure behaviours: finding out what the patient already knows or suspects about their diagnosis; using the actual words 'dementia' or 'Alzheimer's disease' when talking to the patient; and exploring what the diagnosis means to the patient. We conducted a questionnaire survey of older peoples' mental health teams (MHTs) based upon theoretical constructs from the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and used the findings to identify factors that predicted mental health professionals' intentions to perform each behaviour. We selected behaviour change techniques likely to alter these factors. Results: The change techniques selected were: persuasive communication to target subjective norm; behavioural modelling and graded tasks to target self-efficacy; persuasive communication to target attitude towards the use of explicit terminology when talking to the patient; and behavioural modelling by MHTs to target perceived behavioural control for finding out what the patient already knows or suspects and exploring what the diagnosis means to the patient. We operationalised these behaviour change techniques using an interactive 'pen and paper' intervention designed to increase intentions to perform the three target behaviours. Conclusion : It is feasible to develop an intervention to change professional behaviour based upon theoretical models, empirical data and evidence based behaviour change techniques. The next step is to evaluate the effect of such an intervention on behavioural intention. We argue that this approach to development and reporting of interventions will contribute to the science of implementation by providing replicable interventions that illuminate the principles and processes underlying change.This project is funded by UK Medical Research Council, Grant reference number G0300999. Jeremy Grimshaw holds a Canada Research Chair in Health Knowledge Transfer and Uptake. Jill Francis is funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorate. The views expressed in this study are those of the authors

Improving professional practice in the disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia : a modeling experiment to evaluate a theory-based intervention

The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com.Peer reviewedPostprin

Using psychological theory to understand the clinical management of type 2 diabetes in Primary Care : a comparison across two European countries

Peer reviewedPublisher PD