专家就多层次实施假设达成共识,以促进青少年护理指南的采用:德尔菲研究。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Eveline M Dubbeldeman, Rianne M J J van der Kleij, Evelyn A Brakema, Mathilde R Crone
{"title":"专家就多层次实施假设达成共识,以促进青少年护理指南的采用:德尔菲研究。","authors":"Eveline M Dubbeldeman, Rianne M J J van der Kleij, Evelyn A Brakema, Mathilde R Crone","doi":"10.1186/s12961-024-01167-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The implementation of youth care guidelines remains a complex process. Several evidence-based frameworks aid the identification and specification of implementation determinants and strategies. However, the influence of specific strategies on certain determinants remains unclear. Therefore, we need to clarify which active ingredients of strategies, known as behaviour change techniques (BCTs), elicit behaviour change and improve implementation outcomes. With this knowledge, we are able to formulate evidence-based implementation hypotheses. An implementation hypothesis details how determinants and in turn, implementation outcomes might be influenced by specific implementation strategies and their BCTs. We aimed to identify (1) determinants relevant to the implementation of youth care guidelines and (2) feasible and potentially effective implementation hypotheses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A four-round online modified Delphi study was conducted. In the first round, experts rated the implementation determinants based on their relevance. Next, experts formulated implementation hypotheses by connecting BCTs and implementation strategies to determinants and were asked to provide a rationale for their choices. In round three, the experts reconsidered and finalised their hypotheses based on an anonymous overview of all formulated hypotheses, including rationales. Finally, the experts rated the implementation hypotheses based on their potential effectiveness and feasibility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen experts completed the first, second, and third rounds, with 11 completed the final round. Guideline promotion, mandatory education, presence of an implementation leader, poor management support, knowledge regarding guideline use, and a lack of communication skills were reported as most relevant determinants. In total, 46 hypotheses were formulated, ranging from 6 to 9 per determinant. For each determinant, we provide an overview of the implementation hypotheses that were most commonly deemed feasible and potentially effective.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study offers valuable insights into youth care guideline implementation by systematically identifying relevant determinants and formulating hypotheses based on expert input. Determinants related to engagement and to knowledge and skills were found to be relevant to youth care guideline implementation. This study offers a set of hypotheses that could help organisations, policymakers, and professionals guide the implementation process of youth care guidelines to ultimately improve implementation outcomes. The effectiveness of these hypotheses in practice remains to be assessed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12870,"journal":{"name":"Health Research Policy and Systems","volume":"22 1","pages":"89"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11295487/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expert consensus on multilevel implementation hypotheses to promote the uptake of youth care guidelines: a Delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"Eveline M Dubbeldeman, Rianne M J J van der Kleij, Evelyn A Brakema, Mathilde R Crone\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12961-024-01167-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The implementation of youth care guidelines remains a complex process. Several evidence-based frameworks aid the identification and specification of implementation determinants and strategies. However, the influence of specific strategies on certain determinants remains unclear. Therefore, we need to clarify which active ingredients of strategies, known as behaviour change techniques (BCTs), elicit behaviour change and improve implementation outcomes. With this knowledge, we are able to formulate evidence-based implementation hypotheses. An implementation hypothesis details how determinants and in turn, implementation outcomes might be influenced by specific implementation strategies and their BCTs. We aimed to identify (1) determinants relevant to the implementation of youth care guidelines and (2) feasible and potentially effective implementation hypotheses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A four-round online modified Delphi study was conducted. In the first round, experts rated the implementation determinants based on their relevance. Next, experts formulated implementation hypotheses by connecting BCTs and implementation strategies to determinants and were asked to provide a rationale for their choices. In round three, the experts reconsidered and finalised their hypotheses based on an anonymous overview of all formulated hypotheses, including rationales. Finally, the experts rated the implementation hypotheses based on their potential effectiveness and feasibility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen experts completed the first, second, and third rounds, with 11 completed the final round. Guideline promotion, mandatory education, presence of an implementation leader, poor management support, knowledge regarding guideline use, and a lack of communication skills were reported as most relevant determinants. In total, 46 hypotheses were formulated, ranging from 6 to 9 per determinant. For each determinant, we provide an overview of the implementation hypotheses that were most commonly deemed feasible and potentially effective.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study offers valuable insights into youth care guideline implementation by systematically identifying relevant determinants and formulating hypotheses based on expert input. Determinants related to engagement and to knowledge and skills were found to be relevant to youth care guideline implementation. This study offers a set of hypotheses that could help organisations, policymakers, and professionals guide the implementation process of youth care guidelines to ultimately improve implementation outcomes. The effectiveness of these hypotheses in practice remains to be assessed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12870,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11295487/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01167-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Research Policy and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01167-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:青少年护理指南的实施仍然是一个复杂的过程。一些循证框架有助于确定和规范实施的决定因素和策略。然而,具体策略对某些决定因素的影响仍不明确。因此,我们需要明确哪些策略(即行为改变技术 (BCT))的有效成分能够引起行为改变并改善实施结果。有了这些知识,我们就能提出基于证据的实施假设。实施假设详细说明了决定因素以及实施结果如何受到具体实施策略及其 BCT 的影响。我们的目标是确定:(1)与青少年护理指南实施相关的决定因素;(2)可行且潜在有效的实施假设:我们进行了四轮在线改良德尔菲研究。在第一轮研究中,专家们根据实施决定因素的相关性对其进行评分。接下来,专家们将生物技术和实施策略与决定因素联系起来,从而提出实施假设,并要求专家们为其选择提供理由。在第三轮中,专家们根据对所有提出的假设(包括理由)进行的匿名概述,重新考虑并最终确定了他们的假设。最后,专家们根据其潜在的有效性和可行性对实施假设进行评分:结果:14 位专家完成了第一、第二和第三轮讨论,11 位专家完成了最后一轮讨论。据报告,最相关的决定因素包括指南推广、强制性教育、实施领导者的存在、管理支持不力、对指南使用的了解以及缺乏沟通技巧。我们总共提出了 46 个假设,每个决定因素的假设从 6 个到 9 个不等。针对每个决定因素,我们概述了最常被认为可行且可能有效的实施假设:本研究通过系统地识别相关决定因素并根据专家意见提出假设,为青少年护理指南的实施提供了宝贵的见解。研究发现,与参与、知识和技能有关的决定因素与青少年护理指南的实施相关。这项研究提出了一系列假设,可以帮助组织、政策制定者和专业人士指导青少年护理指南的实施过程,最终改善实施结果。这些假设在实践中的有效性还有待评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Expert consensus on multilevel implementation hypotheses to promote the uptake of youth care guidelines: a Delphi study.

Background: The implementation of youth care guidelines remains a complex process. Several evidence-based frameworks aid the identification and specification of implementation determinants and strategies. However, the influence of specific strategies on certain determinants remains unclear. Therefore, we need to clarify which active ingredients of strategies, known as behaviour change techniques (BCTs), elicit behaviour change and improve implementation outcomes. With this knowledge, we are able to formulate evidence-based implementation hypotheses. An implementation hypothesis details how determinants and in turn, implementation outcomes might be influenced by specific implementation strategies and their BCTs. We aimed to identify (1) determinants relevant to the implementation of youth care guidelines and (2) feasible and potentially effective implementation hypotheses.

Methods: A four-round online modified Delphi study was conducted. In the first round, experts rated the implementation determinants based on their relevance. Next, experts formulated implementation hypotheses by connecting BCTs and implementation strategies to determinants and were asked to provide a rationale for their choices. In round three, the experts reconsidered and finalised their hypotheses based on an anonymous overview of all formulated hypotheses, including rationales. Finally, the experts rated the implementation hypotheses based on their potential effectiveness and feasibility.

Results: Fourteen experts completed the first, second, and third rounds, with 11 completed the final round. Guideline promotion, mandatory education, presence of an implementation leader, poor management support, knowledge regarding guideline use, and a lack of communication skills were reported as most relevant determinants. In total, 46 hypotheses were formulated, ranging from 6 to 9 per determinant. For each determinant, we provide an overview of the implementation hypotheses that were most commonly deemed feasible and potentially effective.

Conclusion: This study offers valuable insights into youth care guideline implementation by systematically identifying relevant determinants and formulating hypotheses based on expert input. Determinants related to engagement and to knowledge and skills were found to be relevant to youth care guideline implementation. This study offers a set of hypotheses that could help organisations, policymakers, and professionals guide the implementation process of youth care guidelines to ultimately improve implementation outcomes. The effectiveness of these hypotheses in practice remains to be assessed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health Research Policy and Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
124
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Research Policy and Systems is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a platform for the global research community to share their views, findings, insights and successes. Health Research Policy and Systems considers manuscripts that investigate the role of evidence-based health policy and health research systems in ensuring the efficient utilization and application of knowledge to improve health and health equity, especially in developing countries. Research is the foundation for improvements in public health. The problem is that people involved in different areas of research, together with managers and administrators in charge of research entities, do not communicate sufficiently with each other.
×
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