How effective are social norms interventions in changing the clinical behaviours of healthcare workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mei Yee Tang, Sarah Rhodes, Rachael Powell, Laura McGowan, Elizabeth Howarth, Benjamin Brown, Sarah Cotterill
{"title":"How effective are social norms interventions in changing the clinical behaviours of healthcare workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mei Yee Tang, Sarah Rhodes, Rachael Powell, Laura McGowan, Elizabeth Howarth, Benjamin Brown, Sarah Cotterill","doi":"10.1186/s13012-020-01072-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Healthcare workers perform clinical behaviours which impact on patient diagnoses, care, treatment and recovery. Some methods of supporting healthcare workers in changing their behaviour make use of social norms by exposing healthcare workers to the beliefs, values, attitudes or behaviours of a reference group or person. This review aimed to evaluate evidence on (i) the effect of social norms interventions on healthcare worker clinical behaviour change and (ii) the contexts, modes of delivery and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) associated with effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Searches were undertaken in seven databases. The primary outcome was compliance with a desired healthcare worker clinical behaviour and the secondary outcome was patient health outcomes. Outcomes were converted into standardised mean differences (SMDs). We performed meta-analyses and presented forest plots, stratified by five social norms BCTs (social comparison, credible source, social reward, social incentive and information about others' approval). Sources of variation in social norms BCTs, context and mode of delivery were explored using forest plots, meta-regression and network meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Combined data from 116 trials suggested that social norms interventions were associated with an improvement in healthcare worker clinical behaviour outcomes of 0.08 SMDs (95%CI 0.07 to 0.10) (n = 100 comparisons), and an improvement in patient health outcomes of 0.17 SMDs (95%CI 0.14 to 0.20) (n = 14), on average. Heterogeneity was high, with an overall I<sup>2</sup> of 85.4% (healthcare worker clinical behaviour) and 91.5% (patient health outcomes). Credible source was more effective on average, compared to control conditions (SMD 0.30, 95%CI 0.13 to 0.47, n = 7). Social comparison also appeared effective, both on its own (SMD 0.05, 95%CI 0.03 to 0.08, n = 33) and with other BCTs, and seemed particularly effective when combined with prompts/cues (0.33, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.44, n = 5).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Social norms interventions appeared to be an effective method of changing the clinical behaviour of healthcare workers and have a positive effect on patient health outcomes in a variety of health service contexts. Although the overall result is modest and variable, there is the potential for social norms interventions to be applied at large scale.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42016045718 .</p>","PeriodicalId":417097,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science : IS","volume":" ","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7792225/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science : IS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01072-1","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: Healthcare workers perform clinical behaviours which impact on patient diagnoses, care, treatment and recovery. Some methods of supporting healthcare workers in changing their behaviour make use of social norms by exposing healthcare workers to the beliefs, values, attitudes or behaviours of a reference group or person. This review aimed to evaluate evidence on (i) the effect of social norms interventions on healthcare worker clinical behaviour change and (ii) the contexts, modes of delivery and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) associated with effectiveness.

Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Searches were undertaken in seven databases. The primary outcome was compliance with a desired healthcare worker clinical behaviour and the secondary outcome was patient health outcomes. Outcomes were converted into standardised mean differences (SMDs). We performed meta-analyses and presented forest plots, stratified by five social norms BCTs (social comparison, credible source, social reward, social incentive and information about others' approval). Sources of variation in social norms BCTs, context and mode of delivery were explored using forest plots, meta-regression and network meta-analysis.

Results: Combined data from 116 trials suggested that social norms interventions were associated with an improvement in healthcare worker clinical behaviour outcomes of 0.08 SMDs (95%CI 0.07 to 0.10) (n = 100 comparisons), and an improvement in patient health outcomes of 0.17 SMDs (95%CI 0.14 to 0.20) (n = 14), on average. Heterogeneity was high, with an overall I2 of 85.4% (healthcare worker clinical behaviour) and 91.5% (patient health outcomes). Credible source was more effective on average, compared to control conditions (SMD 0.30, 95%CI 0.13 to 0.47, n = 7). Social comparison also appeared effective, both on its own (SMD 0.05, 95%CI 0.03 to 0.08, n = 33) and with other BCTs, and seemed particularly effective when combined with prompts/cues (0.33, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.44, n = 5).

Conclusions: Social norms interventions appeared to be an effective method of changing the clinical behaviour of healthcare workers and have a positive effect on patient health outcomes in a variety of health service contexts. Although the overall result is modest and variable, there is the potential for social norms interventions to be applied at large scale.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42016045718 .

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

社会规范干预在改变医护人员临床行为方面的效果如何?系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:医护人员的临床行为影响患者的诊断、护理、治疗和康复。一些支持卫生保健工作者改变其行为的方法利用社会规范,使卫生保健工作者了解参考群体或个人的信仰、价值观、态度或行为。本综述旨在评估以下方面的证据:(i)社会规范干预对医护人员临床行为改变的影响;(ii)与有效性相关的环境、分娩模式和行为改变技术(bct)。方法:对随机对照试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析。在七个数据库中进行了搜索。主要结果是依从期望医护人员的临床行为,次要结果是患者的健康结果。结果转换为标准化平均差异(SMDs)。我们进行了荟萃分析,并绘制了森林图,通过五种社会规范bct(社会比较、可信来源、社会奖励、社会激励和他人认可信息)进行分层。利用森林样地、元回归和网络元分析,探讨了社会规范、BCTs、环境和交付方式的变异来源。结果:来自116项试验的综合数据表明,社会规范干预与卫生保健工作者临床行为结果的改善有关,平均为0.08例(95%CI 0.07至0.10)(n = 100个比较),与患者健康结果的改善有关,平均为0.17例(95%CI 0.14至0.20)(n = 14)。异质性很高,总体I2为85.4%(医护人员临床行为)和91.5%(患者健康结果)。与对照条件相比,可信源平均更有效(SMD 0.30, 95%CI 0.13至0.47,n = 7)。社会比较本身(SMD 0.05, 95%CI 0.03至0.08,n = 33)和其他btc也显得有效,并且当与提示/线索结合时似乎特别有效(0.33,95%CI 0.22至0.44,n = 5)。结论:社会规范干预似乎是改变医护人员临床行为的有效方法,并在各种卫生服务环境中对患者健康结果产生积极影响。虽然总体结果是适度和可变的,但社会规范干预措施有可能大规模应用。试验注册号:PROSPERO CRD42016045718。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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