Development and proof-of-concept of a complex intervention to support appropriate imaging for musculoskeletal pain: the Betti programme.

IF 3.3
Nicole Lindner, Kristina Buch, Konrad Hierasimowicz, Reinhard Loose, Michael Walz, Karl-Friedrich Schüttler, Veronika van der Wardt, Annika Viniol
{"title":"Development and proof-of-concept of a complex intervention to support appropriate imaging for musculoskeletal pain: the Betti programme.","authors":"Nicole Lindner, Kristina Buch, Konrad Hierasimowicz, Reinhard Loose, Michael Walz, Karl-Friedrich Schüttler, Veronika van der Wardt, Annika Viniol","doi":"10.1186/s43058-026-00949-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inappropriate diagnostic imaging for musculoskeletal pain is common and causes patient harm and unnecessary costs. Existing interventions frequently target single conditions and stakeholders and show limited integration into routine consultations. This study aimed to develop and test a complex intervention to de-implement low-value care by supporting appropriate imaging decisions for musculoskeletal pain in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed Betti (\"Better Imaging\") following the Medical Research Council framework (MRC) for complex interventions. The development was both theory- and evidence-based and included: specification and iterative refinement of a programme theory (logic model); a comprehensive literature review; qualitative interviews with patients; structured expert feedback; and a proof-of-concept test with general practitioners and patients. The Behaviour-Change-Wheel informed intervention components. We addressed early implementation considerations throughout the development process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings from the literature review revealed a wide range of intervention approaches and components. Overall effectiveness was mixed. Reductions in imaging were reported more frequently in multicomponent interventions that included both physician-facing components and patient-facing materials. Qualitative interviews with people with musculoskeletal pain highlighted that expectations of primary care consultations are highly individual and shaped by context (e.g., prior experiences). Expert feedback emphasised communication and reassurance to support imaging decisions. Informed by these findings, we developed Betti, multicomponent intervention comprising: (1) a multimedia training module for general practitioners, (2) a clinical decision support system based on guideline recommendations across musculoskeletal pain, and (3) multimedia patient information materials. In the proof-of-concept test, patients and general practitioners perceived Betti as well structured and supportive. However, implementation challenges emerged: patients were not directed to the materials, indicating that Betti was not integrated into the consultation as intended. These findings led us to refine the programme theory, explicitly positioning consultation-integrated delivery and physician-mediated handover explicitly as essential for our program theory.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Betti is a theory- and evidence-based, stakeholder-developed intervention. Early findings show high acceptability but underscore consultation-integrated delivery as critical. The study adds transferable implementation insights for de-implementing low-value imaging by specifying mechanisms, determinants, and strategy choices beyond tool use, informing further refinement and future feasibility and effectiveness-implementation evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73355,"journal":{"name":"Implementation science communications","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13151194/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation science communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-026-00949-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Inappropriate diagnostic imaging for musculoskeletal pain is common and causes patient harm and unnecessary costs. Existing interventions frequently target single conditions and stakeholders and show limited integration into routine consultations. This study aimed to develop and test a complex intervention to de-implement low-value care by supporting appropriate imaging decisions for musculoskeletal pain in primary care.

Methods: We developed Betti ("Better Imaging") following the Medical Research Council framework (MRC) for complex interventions. The development was both theory- and evidence-based and included: specification and iterative refinement of a programme theory (logic model); a comprehensive literature review; qualitative interviews with patients; structured expert feedback; and a proof-of-concept test with general practitioners and patients. The Behaviour-Change-Wheel informed intervention components. We addressed early implementation considerations throughout the development process.

Results: Findings from the literature review revealed a wide range of intervention approaches and components. Overall effectiveness was mixed. Reductions in imaging were reported more frequently in multicomponent interventions that included both physician-facing components and patient-facing materials. Qualitative interviews with people with musculoskeletal pain highlighted that expectations of primary care consultations are highly individual and shaped by context (e.g., prior experiences). Expert feedback emphasised communication and reassurance to support imaging decisions. Informed by these findings, we developed Betti, multicomponent intervention comprising: (1) a multimedia training module for general practitioners, (2) a clinical decision support system based on guideline recommendations across musculoskeletal pain, and (3) multimedia patient information materials. In the proof-of-concept test, patients and general practitioners perceived Betti as well structured and supportive. However, implementation challenges emerged: patients were not directed to the materials, indicating that Betti was not integrated into the consultation as intended. These findings led us to refine the programme theory, explicitly positioning consultation-integrated delivery and physician-mediated handover explicitly as essential for our program theory.

Conclusions: Betti is a theory- and evidence-based, stakeholder-developed intervention. Early findings show high acceptability but underscore consultation-integrated delivery as critical. The study adds transferable implementation insights for de-implementing low-value imaging by specifying mechanisms, determinants, and strategy choices beyond tool use, informing further refinement and future feasibility and effectiveness-implementation evaluation.

开发和概念验证的复杂干预措施,以支持适当的成像肌肉骨骼疼痛:贝蒂计划。
背景:不恰当的肌肉骨骼疼痛诊断成像是常见的,并造成患者伤害和不必要的费用。现有的干预措施往往针对单一的条件和利益相关者,并且在常规磋商中整合有限。本研究旨在开发和测试一种复杂的干预措施,通过支持初级保健中肌肉骨骼疼痛的适当成像决策来实现低价值护理。方法:我们根据医学研究委员会框架(MRC)开发了用于复杂干预的Betti(“更好的成像”)。这一发展既有理论依据,也有实证依据,包括:程序理论(逻辑模型)的规范和迭代改进;综合文献综述;对患者进行定性访谈;结构化专家反馈;在全科医生和病人中进行概念验证测试。行为改变之轮通知干预组件。我们在整个开发过程中处理了早期实现的考虑事项。结果:文献综述的发现揭示了广泛的干预方法和成分。总体效果好坏参半。在包括面向医生和面向患者材料的多组分干预中,成像减少的报道更为频繁。对肌肉骨骼疼痛患者的定性访谈强调,对初级保健咨询的期望是高度个性化的,并受环境(例如,先前的经验)的影响。专家反馈强调沟通和保证,以支持成像决策。根据这些发现,我们开发了Betti,多组件干预包括:(1)全科医生的多媒体培训模块,(2)基于肌肉骨骼疼痛指南建议的临床决策支持系统,以及(3)多媒体患者信息材料。在概念验证测试中,患者和全科医生认为Betti结构良好,具有支持性。然而,实施方面的挑战出现了:患者没有直接看到这些材料,这表明Betti没有像预期的那样融入咨询。这些发现促使我们完善了程序理论,明确地将整合咨询的交付和医生介导的移交明确地定位为我们的程序理论的关键。结论:Betti是一种基于理论和证据的利益相关者开发的干预措施。早期调查结果显示可接受性很高,但强调综合协商交付至关重要。该研究通过详细说明工具使用之外的机制、决定因素和策略选择,为实现低价值成像增加了可转移的实施见解,为进一步改进和未来的可行性和有效性实施评估提供了信息。
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
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书