Barriers and Facilitators to Using a Clinical Decision Support Tool for Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Stephanie A Hooker, Leif I Solberg, Kathleen M Miley, Caitlin M Borgert-Spaniol, Rebecca C Rossom
{"title":"Barriers and Facilitators to Using a Clinical Decision Support Tool for Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care.","authors":"Stephanie A Hooker, Leif I Solberg, Kathleen M Miley, Caitlin M Borgert-Spaniol, Rebecca C Rossom","doi":"10.3122/jabfm.2023.230308R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Clinical decision support (CDS) tools are designed to help primary care clinicians (PCCs) implement evidence-based guidelines for chronic disease care. CDS tools may also be helpful for opioid use disorder (OUD), but only if PCCs use them in their regular workflow. This study's purpose was to understand PCC and clinic leader perceptions of barriers to using an OUD-CDS tool in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PCCs and leaders (n = 13) from clinics in an integrated health system in which an OUD-CDS tool was implemented participated in semistructured qualitative interviews. Questions aimed to understand whether the CDS tool design, implementation, context, and content were barriers or facilitators to using the OUD-CDS in primary care. Recruitment stopped when thematic saturation was reached. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used to generate overall themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five themes emerged: (1) PCCs prefer to minimize conversations about OUD risk and treatment; (2) PCCs are enthusiastic about a CDS tool that addresses a topic of interest but lack interest in treating OUD; (3) contextual barriers in primary care limit PCCs' ability to use CDS to manage OUD; (4) CDS needs to be simple and visible, save time, and add value to care; and (5) CDS has value in identifying and screening patients and facilitating referrals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study identified several factors that impact use of an OUD-CDS tool in primary care, including PCC interest in treating OUD, contextual barriers, and CDS design. These results may help others interested in implementing CDS for OUD in primary care.</p>","PeriodicalId":50018,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"389-398"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11555580/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2023.230308R1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Clinical decision support (CDS) tools are designed to help primary care clinicians (PCCs) implement evidence-based guidelines for chronic disease care. CDS tools may also be helpful for opioid use disorder (OUD), but only if PCCs use them in their regular workflow. This study's purpose was to understand PCC and clinic leader perceptions of barriers to using an OUD-CDS tool in primary care.

Methods: PCCs and leaders (n = 13) from clinics in an integrated health system in which an OUD-CDS tool was implemented participated in semistructured qualitative interviews. Questions aimed to understand whether the CDS tool design, implementation, context, and content were barriers or facilitators to using the OUD-CDS in primary care. Recruitment stopped when thematic saturation was reached. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used to generate overall themes.

Results: Five themes emerged: (1) PCCs prefer to minimize conversations about OUD risk and treatment; (2) PCCs are enthusiastic about a CDS tool that addresses a topic of interest but lack interest in treating OUD; (3) contextual barriers in primary care limit PCCs' ability to use CDS to manage OUD; (4) CDS needs to be simple and visible, save time, and add value to care; and (5) CDS has value in identifying and screening patients and facilitating referrals.

Conclusions: This study identified several factors that impact use of an OUD-CDS tool in primary care, including PCC interest in treating OUD, contextual barriers, and CDS design. These results may help others interested in implementing CDS for OUD in primary care.

在初级医疗中使用阿片类药物使用障碍临床决策支持工具的障碍和促进因素。
目的:临床决策支持(CDS)工具旨在帮助初级保健临床医生(PCCs)实施慢性病护理的循证指南。临床决策支持工具可能对阿片类药物使用障碍 (OUD) 也有帮助,但前提是初级保健医生必须在常规工作流程中使用这些工具。本研究旨在了解 PCC 和诊所负责人对在初级保健中使用 OUD-CDS 工具的障碍的看法:方法:在一个实施了 OUD-CDS 工具的综合医疗系统中,来自诊所的 PCC 和领导(n = 13)参加了半结构化定性访谈。问题旨在了解 CDS 工具的设计、实施、背景和内容是在初级保健中使用 OUD-CDS 的障碍还是促进因素。当达到主题饱和时,即停止招募。我们采用归纳式主题分析方法得出了总体主题:出现了五个主题:(1) 初级保健中心倾向于尽量减少有关 OUD 风险和治疗的对话;(2) 初级保健中心对解决感兴趣主题的 CDS 工具充满热情,但对治疗 OUD 缺乏兴趣;(3) 初级保健中的环境障碍限制了初级保健中心使用 CDS 管理 OUD 的能力;(4) CDS 需要简单可见、节省时间并为保健增值;(5) CDS 在识别和筛查患者以及促进转诊方面具有价值:本研究确定了影响在初级保健中使用 OUD-CDS 工具的几个因素,包括初级保健中心对治疗 OUD 的兴趣、环境障碍和 CDS 设计。这些结果可能会对其他有意在初级保健中实施 OUD CDS 的人有所帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
168
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1988, the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine ( JABFM ) is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM). Believing that the public and scientific communities are best served by open access to information, JABFM makes its articles available free of charge and without registration at www.jabfm.org. JABFM is indexed by Medline, Index Medicus, and other services.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信