A cluster randomised controlled trial of a web based decision aid to support parents' decisions about their child's Measles Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccination.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a web based decision aid versus a leaflet versus, usual practice in reducing parents' decisional conflict for the first dose MMR vaccination decision. The, impact on MMR vaccine uptake was also explored. DESIGN: Three-arm cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Fifty GP practices in the north of, England. PARTICIPANTS: 220 first time parents making a first dose MMR decision. INTERVENTIONS: Web, based MMR decision aid plus usual practice, MMR leaflet plus usual practice versus usual practice only, (control). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Decisional conflict was the primary outcome and used as the, measure of parents' levels of informed decision-making. MMR uptake was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Decisional conflict decreased post-intervention for both intervention arms to a level where, parents could make an informed MMR decision (decision aid: effect estimate=1.09, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.82; information leaflet: effect estimate=-0.67, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.46). Trial arm was significantly, associated (p<0.001) with decisional conflict at post-intervention. Vaccination uptake was 100%, 91%, and 99% in the decision aid, leaflet and control arms, respectively (χ(2) (1, N=203)=8.69; p=0.017). Post-hoc tests revealed a statistically significant difference in uptake between the information leaflet, and the usual practice arms (p=0.04), and a near statistically significant difference between the, decision aid and leaflet arms (p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Parents' decisional conflict was reduced in both, the decision aid and leaflet arms. The decision aid also prompted parents to act upon that decision and, vaccinate their child. Achieving both outcomes is fundamental to the integration of immunisation, decision aids within routine practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN72521372

Acceptability and feasibility of peer assisted supervision and support for intervention practitioners: a Q-methodology evaluation

Evidence-based interventions often include quality improvement methods to support fidelity and improve client outcomes. Clinical supervision is promoted as an effective way of developing practitioner confidence and competence in delivery; however, supervision is often inconsistent and embedded in hierarchical line management structures that may limit the opportunity for reflective learning. The Peer Assisted Supervision and Support (PASS) supervision model uses peer relationships to promote the self-regulatory capacity of practitioners to improve intervention delivery. The aim of the present study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of PASS amongst parenting intervention practitioners. A Q-methodology approach was used to generate data and 30 practitioners volunteered to participate in the study. Data were analyzed and interpreted using standard Q-methodology procedures and by-person factor analysis yielded three factors. There was consensus that PASS was acceptable. Participants shared the view that PASS facilitated an environment of support where negative aspects of interpersonal relationships that might develop in supervision were not evident. Two factors represented the viewpoint that PASS was also a feasible model of supervision. However, the third factor was comprised of practitioners who reported that PASS could be time consuming and difficult to fit into existing work demands. There were differences across the three factors in the extent to which practitioners considered PASS impacted on their intervention delivery. The findings highlight the importance of organizational mechanisms that support practitioner engagement in supervision

UNderstanding uptake of Immunisations in Travelling aNd Gypsy communities (UNITING): a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND: Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (referred to as Travellers) are less likely to access health services, including immunisation. To improve immunisation rates, we need to understand what helps and hinders individuals in these communities in taking up immunisations. AIMS: (1) Investigate the barriers to and facilitators of acceptability and uptake of immunisations among six Traveller communities across four UK cities; and (2) identify possible interventions to increase uptake of immunisations in these Traveller communities that could be tested in a subsequent feasibility study. METHODS: Three-phase qualitative study underpinned by the social ecological model. Phase 1: interviews with 174 Travellers from six communities: Romanian Roma (Bristol); English Gypsy/Irish Traveller (Bristol); English Gypsy (York); Romanian/Slovakian Roma (Glasgow); Scottish Showpeople (Glasgow); and Irish Traveller (London). Focus on childhood and adult vaccines. Phase 2: interviews with 39 service providers. Data were analysed using the framework approach. Interventions were identified using a modified intervention mapping approach. Phase 3: 51 Travellers and 25 service providers attended workshops and produced a prioritised list of potentially acceptable and feasible interventions. RESULTS: There were many common accounts of barriers and facilitators across communities, particularly across the English-speaking communities. Scottish Showpeople were the most similar to the general population. Roma communities experienced additional barriers of language and being in a new country. Men, women and service providers described similar barriers and facilitators. There was widespread acceptance of childhood and adult immunisation, with current parents perceived as more positive than their elders. A minority of English-speaking Travellers worried about multiple/combined childhood vaccines, adult flu and whooping cough. Cultural concerns about vaccines offered during pregnancy and about human papillomavirus were most evident in the Bristol English Gypsy/Irish Traveller community. Language, literacy, discrimination, poor school attendance, poverty and housing were identified by Travellers and service providers as barriers for some. Trustful relationships with health professionals were important and continuity of care was valued. A few English-speaking Travellers described problems of booking and attending for immunisation. Service providers tailored their approach to Travellers, particularly the Roma. Funding cuts, NHS reforms and poor monitoring challenged their work. Five ‘top-priority’ interventions were agreed across communities and service providers to improve the immunisation among Travellers who are housed or settled on an authorised site: (1) cultural competence training for health professionals and frontline staff; (2) identification of Travellers in health records to tailor support and monitor uptake; (3) provision of a named frontline person in general practitioner practices to provide respectful and supportive service; (4) flexible and diverse systems for booking appointments, recall and reminders; and (5) protected funding for health visitors specialising in Traveller health, including immunisation. LIMITATIONS: No Travellers living on the roadside or on unofficial encampments were interviewed. We should exert caution in generalising to these groups. FUTURE WORK: To include development, implementation and evaluation of a national policy plan (and practice guidance plan) to promote the uptake of immunisation among Traveller communities. STUDY REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN20019630 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio number 15182. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 72. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Role of "external facilitation" in implementation of research findings: a qualitative evaluation of facilitation experiences in the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND: Facilitation has been identified in the literature as a potentially key component of successful implementation. It has not, however, either been well-defined or well-studied. Significant questions remain about the operational definition of facilitation and about the relationship of facilitation to other interventions, especially to other change agent roles when used in multi-faceted implementation projects. Researchers who are part of the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) are actively exploring various approaches and processes, including facilitation, to enable implementation of best practices in the Veterans Health Administration health care system – the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States. This paper describes a systematic, retrospective evaluation of implementation-related facilitation experiences within QUERI, a quality improvement program developed by the US Department of Veterans Affairs. METHODS: A post-hoc evaluation was conducted through a series of semi-structured interviews to examine the concept of facilitation across several multi-site QUERI implementation studies. The interview process is based on a technique developed in the field of education, which systematically enhances learning through experience by stimulating recall and reflection regarding past complex activities. An iterative content analysis approach relative to a set of conceptually-based interview questions was used for data analysis. FINDINGS: Findings suggest that facilitation, within an implementation study initiated by a central change agency, is a deliberate and valued process of interactive problem solving and support that occurs in the context of a recognized need for improvement and a supportive interpersonal relationship. Facilitation was described primarily as a distinct role with a number of potentially crucial behaviors and activities. Data further suggest that external facilitators were likely to use or integrate other implementation interventions, while performing this problem-solving and supportive role. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation provides evidence to suggest that facilitation could be considered a distinct implementation intervention, just as audit and feedback, educational outreach, or similar methods are considered to be discrete interventions. As such, facilitation should be well-defined and explicitly evaluated for its perceived usefulness within multi-intervention implementation projects. Additionally, researchers should better define the specific contribution of facilitation to the success of implementation in different types of projects, different types of sites, and with evidence and innovations of varying levels of strength and complexity

Prevention of delirium (POD) for older people in hospital: study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial

Background: Delirium is the most frequent complication among older people following hospitalisation. Delirium may be prevented in about one-third of patients using a multicomponent intervention. However, in the United Kingdom, the National Health Service has no routine delirium prevention care systems. We have developed the Prevention of Delirium Programme, a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention and implementation process. We have successfully carried out a pilot study to test the feasibility and acceptability of implementation of the programme. We are now undertaking preliminary testing of the programme. Methods/Design: The Prevention of Delirium Study is a multicentre, cluster randomised feasibility study designed to explore the potential effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Prevention of Delirium Programme. Sixteen elderly care medicine and orthopaedic/trauma wards in eight National Health Service acute hospitals will be randomised to receive the Prevention of Delirium Programme or usual care. Patients will be eligible for the trial if they have been admitted to a participating ward and are aged 65 years or over. The primary objectives of the study are to provide a preliminary estimate of the effectiveness of the Prevention of Delirium Programme as measured by the incidence of new onset delirium, assess the variability of the incidence of new-onset delirium, estimate the intracluster correlation coefficient and likely cluster size, assess barriers to the delivery of the Prevention of Delirium Programme system of care, assess compliance with the Prevention of Delirium Programme system of care, estimate recruitment and follow-up rates, assess the degree of contamination due to between-ward staff movements, and investigate differences in financial costs and benefits between the Prevention of Delirium Programme system of care and standard practice. Secondary objectives are to investigate differences in the number, severity and length of delirium episodes (including persistent delirium); length of stay in hospital; inhospital mortality; destination at discharge; health-related quality of life and health resource use; physical and social independence; anxiety and depression; and patient experience. Discussion: This feasibility study will be used to gather data to inform the design of a future definitive randomised controlled trial. Trial registration: ISRCTN01187372. Registered 13 March 2014

Nurses' perceived barriers to the implementation of a Fall Prevention Clinical Practice Guideline in Singapore hospitals

BackgroundTheories of behavior change indicate that an analysis of barriers to change is helpful when trying to influence professional practice. The aim of this study was to assess the perceived barriers to practice change by eliciting nurses\u27 opinions with regard to barriers to, and facilitators of, implementation of a Fall Prevention clinical practice guideline in five acute care hospitals in Singapore.MethodsNurses were surveyed to identify their perceptions regarding barriers to implementation of clinical practice guidelines in their practice setting. The validated questionnaire, \u27Barriers and facilitators assessment instrument\u27, was administered to nurses (n = 1830) working in the medical, surgical, geriatric units, at five acute care hospitals in Singapore.ResultsAn 80.2% response rate was achieved. The greatest barriers to implementation of clinical practice guidelines reported included: knowledge and motivation, availability of support staff, access to facilities, health status of patients, and, education of staff and patients.ConclusionNumerous barriers to the use of the Fall Prevention Clinical Practice Guideline have been identified. This study has laid the foundation for further research into implementation of clinical practice guidelines in Singapore by identifying barriers to change in acute care settings.<br /

How can continuing professional development better promote shared decision-making? : perspectives from an international collaboration

Background: Shared decision-making is not widely implemented in healthcare. We aimed to set a research agenda about promoting shared decision-making through continuing professional development. Methods: Thirty-six participants met for two days. Results: Participants suggested ways to improve an environmental scan that had inventoried 53 shared decisionmaking training programs from 14 countries. Their proposed research agenda included reaching an international consensus on shared decision-making competencies and creating a framework for accrediting continuing professional development initiatives in shared decision-making. Conclusions: Variability in shared decision-making training programs showcases the need for quality assurance frameworks