Evaluation of the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication: a multimethods process evaluation.

IF 1.3 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Laura H M Marcellis, Anneroos Sinnige, Anne G E van Bergen, Steffie Spruijt, Andrew Kittelson, Joep A W Teijink, Philip J van der Wees, Thomas J Hoogeboom
{"title":"Evaluation of the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication: a multimethods process evaluation.","authors":"Laura H M Marcellis, Anneroos Sinnige, Anne G E van Bergen, Steffie Spruijt, Andrew Kittelson, Joep A W Teijink, Philip J van der Wees, Thomas J Hoogeboom","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Personalised outcomes forecasts (POFs) were introduced among physical and exercise therapists in the Netherlands to optimise supervised exercise therapy for patients with intermittent claudication. Yet, therapists' initial adoption and sustainable implementation of POFs can be influenced by various factors.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine therapists' adoption of the POFs, their fidelity to the measurement protocol for supervised exercise therapy, and their perceived barriers and facilitators for using POFs in practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multimethod process evaluation was conducted, including quantitative descriptive and pre-post approaches, as well as a qualitative framework approach. To examine adoption, we evaluated the proportion of therapists who expressed interest in POFs by completing one of three provided e-learnings and the proportion of therapists who started using POFs in practice. To examine fidelity to the measurement protocol, we compared the per-episode proportion of follow-up measurements documented by therapists preimplementation and postimplementation. Qualitative data on barriers and facilitators were identified through semistructured interviews with therapists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One year after the implementation, 89% of therapists eligible to use POFs (n=1727) completed at least one e-learning and 51% of therapists started using POFs. The per-episode proportion of documented follow-up measurements per therapist increased, from a mean rate of 37% (3 months) and 22% (6 months) during the preimplementation period to a mean rate of 53% (3 months) and 32% (6 months) during the postimplementation period (p<0.001). Among interviewed therapists (n=12), identified barriers included competing demands and a lack of skills or confidence. Identified facilitators included the potential to improve the quality of care and a positive user attitude.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that although there is initial interest in and adoption of POFs, addressing barriers and leveraging facilitators through tailored implementation strategies could further increase their utilisation in practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11751796/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Personalised outcomes forecasts (POFs) were introduced among physical and exercise therapists in the Netherlands to optimise supervised exercise therapy for patients with intermittent claudication. Yet, therapists' initial adoption and sustainable implementation of POFs can be influenced by various factors.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine therapists' adoption of the POFs, their fidelity to the measurement protocol for supervised exercise therapy, and their perceived barriers and facilitators for using POFs in practice.

Methods: A multimethod process evaluation was conducted, including quantitative descriptive and pre-post approaches, as well as a qualitative framework approach. To examine adoption, we evaluated the proportion of therapists who expressed interest in POFs by completing one of three provided e-learnings and the proportion of therapists who started using POFs in practice. To examine fidelity to the measurement protocol, we compared the per-episode proportion of follow-up measurements documented by therapists preimplementation and postimplementation. Qualitative data on barriers and facilitators were identified through semistructured interviews with therapists.

Results: One year after the implementation, 89% of therapists eligible to use POFs (n=1727) completed at least one e-learning and 51% of therapists started using POFs. The per-episode proportion of documented follow-up measurements per therapist increased, from a mean rate of 37% (3 months) and 22% (6 months) during the preimplementation period to a mean rate of 53% (3 months) and 32% (6 months) during the postimplementation period (p<0.001). Among interviewed therapists (n=12), identified barriers included competing demands and a lack of skills or confidence. Identified facilitators included the potential to improve the quality of care and a positive user attitude.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that although there is initial interest in and adoption of POFs, addressing barriers and leveraging facilitators through tailored implementation strategies could further increase their utilisation in practice.

评估个性化结果预测的实施,以优化间歇性跛行患者的监督运动治疗:多方法过程评估。
背景:在荷兰的物理和运动治疗师中引入了个性化结果预测(POFs),以优化间歇性跛行患者的监督运动治疗。然而,治疗师最初采用和持续实施POFs会受到各种因素的影响。目的:本研究的目的是检查治疗师对pof的采用情况,他们对监督运动治疗测量方案的忠实度,以及他们在实践中使用pof的感知障碍和促进因素。方法:采用多方法进行过程评价,包括定量描述法、前后评价法和定性框架评价法。为了检验采用情况,我们评估了通过完成三个提供的电子学习中的一个来表达对POFs感兴趣的治疗师的比例,以及在实践中开始使用POFs的治疗师的比例。为了检验测量方案的准确性,我们比较了治疗师在实施前和实施后记录的每集随访测量的比例。通过与治疗师的半结构化访谈,确定了障碍和促进因素的定性数据。结果:实施一年后,89%有资格使用POFs的治疗师(n=1727)完成了至少一次电子学习,51%的治疗师开始使用POFs。每位治疗师记录的每集随访测量的比例增加,从实施前的平均比率37%(3个月)和22%(6个月)增加到实施后的平均比率53%(3个月)和32%(6个月)。我们的研究结果表明,尽管人们对POFs有初步的兴趣和采用,但通过量身定制的实施策略来解决障碍和利用促进者,可以进一步提高它们在实践中的利用率。
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
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ Open Quality Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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