Understanding practice: the factors that influence management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department-a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Background: Mild traumatic brain injury is a frequent cause of presentation to emergency departments. Despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines in this area, there is variation in practice. One of the aims of the Neurotrauma Evidence Translation program is to develop and evaluate a targeted, theory- and evidence-informed intervention to improve the management of mild traumatic brain injury in Australian emergency departments. This study is the first step in the intervention development process and uses the Theoretical Domains Framework to explore the factors perceived to influence the uptake of four key evidence-based recommended practices for managing mild traumatic brain injury. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with emergency staff in the Australian state of Victoria. The interview guide was developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework to explore current practice and to identify the factors perceived to influence practice. Two researchers coded the interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. Results: A total of 42 participants (9 Directors, 20 doctors and 13 nurses) were interviewed over a seven-month period. The results suggested that (i) the prospective assessment of post-traumatic amnesia was influenced by: knowledge; beliefs about consequences; environmental context and resources; skills; social/professional role and identity; and beliefs about capabilities; (ii) the use of guideline-developed criteria or decision rules to inform the appropriate use of a CT scan was influenced by: knowledge; beliefs about consequences; environmental context and resources; memory, attention and decision processes; beliefs about capabilities; social influences; skills and behavioral regulation; (iii) providing verbal and written patient information on discharge was influenced by: beliefs about consequences; environmental context and resources; memory, attention and decision processes; social/professional role and identity; and knowledge; (iv) the practice of providing brief, routine follow-up on discharge was influenced by: environmental context and resources; social/professional role and identity; knowledge; beliefs about consequences; and motivation and goals. Conclusions: Using the Theoretical Domains Framework, factors thought to influence the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department were identified. These factors present theoretically based targets for a future intervention

The many organisational factors relevant to planning change in emergency care departments:A qualitative study to inform a cluster randomised controlled trial aiming to improve the management of patients with mild traumatic brain injuries

BACKGROUND:The Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) Trial aims to design and evaluate the effectiveness of a targeted theory-and evidence-informed intervention to increase the uptake of evidence-based recommended practices for the management of patients who present to an emergency department (ED) with mild head injuries. When designing interventions to bring about change in organisational settings such as the ED, it is important to understand the impact of the context to ensure successful implementation of practice change. Few studies explicitly use organisational theory to study which factors are likely to be most important to address when planning change processes in the ED. Yet, this setting may have a unique set of organisational pressures that need to be taken into account when implementing new clinical practices. This paper aims to provide an in depth analysis of the organisational context in which ED management of mild head injuries and implementation of new practices occurs, drawing upon organisational level theory. METHODS:Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ED staff in Australia. The interviews explored the organisational context in relation to change and organisational factors influencing the management of patients presenting with mild head injuries. Two researchers coded the interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. The "model of diffusion in service organisations" was used to guide analyses and organisation of the results. RESULTS:Nine directors, 20 doctors and 13 nurses of 13 hospitals were interviewed. With regard to characteristics of the innovation (i.e. the recommended practices) the most important factor was whether they were perceived as being in line with values and needs. Tension for change (the degree to which stakeholders perceive the current situation as intolerable or needing change) was relatively low for managing acute mild head injury symptoms, and mixed for managing longer-term symptoms (higher change commitment, but relatively low change efficacy). Regarding implementation processes, the importance of (visible) senior leadership for all professions involved was identified as a critical factor. An unpredictable and hectic environment brings challenges in creating an environment in which team-based and organisational learning can thrive (system antecedents for innovation). In addition, the position of the ED as the entry-point of the hospital points to the relevance of securing buy-in from other units. CONCLUSIONS:We identified several organisational factors relevant to realising change in ED management of patients who present with mild head injuries. These factors will inform the intervention design and process evaluation in a trial evaluating the effectiveness of our implementation intervention

Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease

Contains fulltext : 154037.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The four approaches to hysterectomy for benign disease are abdominal hysterectomy (AH), vaginal hysterectomy (VH), laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) and robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of different surgical approaches to hysterectomy for women with benign gynaecological conditions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases (from inception to 14 August 2014) using the Ovid platform: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PsycINFO. We also searched relevant citation lists. We used both indexed and free-text terms. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which clinical outcomes were compared between one surgical approach to hysterectomy and another. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and performed data extraction. Our primary outcomes were return to normal activities, satisfaction, quality of life, intraoperative visceral injury and major long-term complications (i.e. fistula, pelvi-abdominal pain, urinary dysfunction, bowel dysfunction, pelvic floor condition and sexual dysfunction). MAIN RESULTS: We included 47 studies with 5102 women. The evidence for most comparisons was of low or moderate quality. The main limitations were poor reporting and imprecision. Vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus abdominal hysterectomy (AH) (nine RCTs, 762 women)Return to normal activities was shorter in the VH group (mean difference (MD) -9.5 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.6 to -6.4, three RCTs, 176 women, I(2) = 75%, moderate quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for the other primary outcomes. Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) versus AH (25 RCTs, 2983 women)Return to normal activities was shorter in the LH group (MD -13.6 days, 95% CI -15.4 to -11.8; six RCTs, 520 women, I(2) = 71%, low quality evidence), but there were more urinary tract injuries in the LH group (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.8, 13 RCTs, 2140 women, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for the other primary outcomes. LH versus VH (16 RCTs, 1440 women)There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for any primary outcomes. Robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) versus LH (two RCTs, 152 women)There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for any primary outcomes. Neither of the studies reported satisfaction rates or quality of life.Overall, the number of adverse events was low in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing hysterectomy for benign disease, VH appears to be superior to LH and AH, as it is associated with faster return to normal activities. When technically feasible, VH should be performed in preference to AH because of more rapid recovery and fewer febrile episodes postoperatively. Where VH is not possible, LH has some advantages over AH (including more rapid recovery and fewer febrile episodes and wound or abdominal wall infections), but these are offset by a longer operating time. No advantages of LH over VH could be found; LH had a longer operation time, and total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) had more urinary tract injuries. Of the three subcategories of LH, there are more RCT data for laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and LH than for TLH. Single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy and RH should either be abandoned or further evaluated since there is a lack of evidence of any benefit over conventional LH. Overall, the evidence in this review has to be interpreted with caution as adverse event rates were low, resulting in low power for these comparisons. The surgical approach to hysterectomy should be discussed and decided in the light of the relative benefits and hazards. These benefits and hazards seem to be dependent on surgical expertise and this may influence the decision. In conclusion, when VH is not feasible, LH may avoid the need for AH, but LH is associated with more urinary tract injuries. There is no evidence that RH is of benefit in this population. Preferably, the surgical approach to hysterectomy should be decided by the woman in discussion with her surgeon

Qualitative study of emergency clinicians to inform a national guideline on the management of children with mild-to-moderate head injuries

Background Head injury is a common reason children present to EDs. Guideline development to improve care for paediatric head injuries should target the information needs of ED clinicians and factors influencing its uptake. Methods We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews (November 2017–November 2018) with a stratified purposive sample of ED clinicians from across Australia and New Zealand. We identified clinician information needs, used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore factors influencing the use of head CT and clinical decision rules/guidelines in CT decision-making, and explored ways to improve guideline uptake. Two researchers coded the interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. Results A total of 43 clinicians (28 doctors, 15 nurses), from 19 hospitals (5 tertiary, 8 suburban, 6 regional/ rural) were interviewed. Clinicians sought guidance for scenarios including ED management of infants, children with underlying medical issues, delayed or representations and potential non-accidental injuries. Improvements to the quality and content of discharge communication and parental discussion materials were suggested. Known risks of radiation from head CTs has led to a culture of observation over use of CT in Australasia (TDF domain: beliefs about consequences). Formal and informal policies have resulted in senior clinicians making most head CT decisions in children (TDF domain: behavioural regulation). Senior clinicians consider their gestalt to be more accurate and outperform existing guidance (TDF domain: beliefs about capabilities), although they perceive guidelines as useful for training and supporting junior staff. Summaries, flow charts, publication in ED-specific journals and scripted training materials were suggestions to improve uptake. Conclusion Information needs of ED clinicians, factors influencing use of head CT in children with head injuries and the role of guidelines were identified. These findings informed the scope and implementation strategies for an Australasian guideline for mild-to-moderate head injuries in children

Domains, theoretical perspectives and influencing factors.

<p>Domains, theoretical perspectives and influencing factors.</p

Four key recommended practices.

<p>Four key recommended practices.</p

Summary of main findings.

<p>Summary of main findings.</p

Implementing evidence-based practices in the care of infants with bronchiolitis in Australasian acute care settings: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled study

Abstract Background Bronchiolitis is the most common reason for admission to hospital for infants less than one year of age. Although management is well defined, there is substantial variation in practice, with infants receiving ineffective therapies or management. This study will test the effectiveness of tailored, theory informed knowledge translation (KT) interventions to decrease the use of five clinical therapies or management processes known to be of no benefit, compared to usual dissemination practices in infants with bronchiolitis. The primary objective is to establish whether the KT interventions are effective in increasing compliance to five evidence based recommendations in the first 24 h following presentation to hospital. The five recommendations are that infants do not receive; salbutamol, antibiotics, glucocorticoids, adrenaline, or a chest x-ray. Methods/design This study is designed as a cluster randomised controlled trial. We will recruit 24 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand, stratified by country and provision of tertiary or secondary paediatric care. Hospitals will be randomised to either control or intervention groups. Control hospitals will receive a copy of the recent Australasian Bronchiolitis Guideline. Intervention hospitals will receive KT interventions informed by a qualitative analysis of factors influencing clinician care of infants with bronchiolitis. Key interventions include, local stakeholder meetings, identifying medical and nursing clinical leads in both emergency departments and paediatric inpatient areas who will attend a single education train-the-trainer day to then deliver standardised staff education with the training materials provided and coordinate audit and feedback reports locally over the study period. Data will be extracted retrospectively for three years prior to the study intervention year, and for seven months of the study intervention year bronchiolitis season following intervention delivery to determine compliance with the five evidence-based recommendations. Data will be collected to assess fidelity to the implementation strategies and to facilitate an economic evaluation. Discussion This study will contribute to the body of knowledge to determine the effectiveness of tailored, theory informed interventions in acute care paediatric settings, with the aim of reducing the evidence to practice gaps in the care of infants with bronchiolitis. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001567415 (retrospectively registered on 14 November 2016)