临床医生对急性疼痛阿片类镇痛药管理临床护理标准的看法

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Chelsea Dutkiewicz , Shania Liu , Asad Patanwala , Andrew J McLachlan , Jennifer Stevens , Kok Eng Khor , Bernadette Bugeja , David Begley , Ian Fong , Katelyn Jauregui , Jonathan Penm
{"title":"临床医生对急性疼痛阿片类镇痛药管理临床护理标准的看法","authors":"Chelsea Dutkiewicz ,&nbsp;Shania Liu ,&nbsp;Asad Patanwala ,&nbsp;Andrew J McLachlan ,&nbsp;Jennifer Stevens ,&nbsp;Kok Eng Khor ,&nbsp;Bernadette Bugeja ,&nbsp;David Begley ,&nbsp;Ian Fong ,&nbsp;Katelyn Jauregui ,&nbsp;Jonathan Penm","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Opioid analgesics are high-risk medicines, widely used in hospitals to manage pain. To improve the use of opioids in Australia, The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care released the first national Opioid Analgesic Stewardship in Acute Pain Clinical Care Standard (Opioid Stewardship Standard). The objective of this study was to explore clinicians’ perspectives of the implementation of the Opioid Stewardship Standard to understand factors that may impact this process.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Qualitative one-on-one interviews were conducted with clinicians, including doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and patient safety officers. The interview guide was developed based on the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research. Interview transcriptions were thematically analyzed using an inductive approach to identify common themes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In total, 32 clinicians were interviewed, including 10 doctors, 10 pharmacists, and 12 nurses from 26 sites across Australia. Themes identified included: (i) Organizational priorities, (ii) organizational capacity for implementation, (iii) changing prescribing practices, and (iv) the Opioid Stewardship Standard.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Clinicians’ perceptions were categorized into four themes regarding the implementation of the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Key findings from this study included the importance of local data to increase organizational prioritization, availability of resources and staffing to increase organizational capacity for implementation to implement the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Future studies should evaluate the impact of such strategies on implementation.</div></div><div><h3>Lay summary</h3><div>Health professionals need more support from the health system to deliver health care that aligns with policies such as the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Organisations within the health system should consider providing support such as staffing to meet these needs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":"13 5","pages":"Article 100936"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinicians’ perspective of the opioid analgesic stewardship in acute pain clinical care standard\",\"authors\":\"Chelsea Dutkiewicz ,&nbsp;Shania Liu ,&nbsp;Asad Patanwala ,&nbsp;Andrew J McLachlan ,&nbsp;Jennifer Stevens ,&nbsp;Kok Eng Khor ,&nbsp;Bernadette Bugeja ,&nbsp;David Begley ,&nbsp;Ian Fong ,&nbsp;Katelyn Jauregui ,&nbsp;Jonathan Penm\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100936\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Opioid analgesics are high-risk medicines, widely used in hospitals to manage pain. To improve the use of opioids in Australia, The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care released the first national Opioid Analgesic Stewardship in Acute Pain Clinical Care Standard (Opioid Stewardship Standard). The objective of this study was to explore clinicians’ perspectives of the implementation of the Opioid Stewardship Standard to understand factors that may impact this process.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Qualitative one-on-one interviews were conducted with clinicians, including doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and patient safety officers. The interview guide was developed based on the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research. Interview transcriptions were thematically analyzed using an inductive approach to identify common themes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In total, 32 clinicians were interviewed, including 10 doctors, 10 pharmacists, and 12 nurses from 26 sites across Australia. Themes identified included: (i) Organizational priorities, (ii) organizational capacity for implementation, (iii) changing prescribing practices, and (iv) the Opioid Stewardship Standard.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Clinicians’ perceptions were categorized into four themes regarding the implementation of the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Key findings from this study included the importance of local data to increase organizational prioritization, availability of resources and staffing to increase organizational capacity for implementation to implement the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Future studies should evaluate the impact of such strategies on implementation.</div></div><div><h3>Lay summary</h3><div>Health professionals need more support from the health system to deliver health care that aligns with policies such as the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Organisations within the health system should consider providing support such as staffing to meet these needs.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"volume\":\"13 5\",\"pages\":\"Article 100936\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883724000996\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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 Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883724000996","RegionNum":3,"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

目标阿片类镇痛药是高风险药物,广泛用于医院的疼痛治疗。为了改善阿片类药物在澳大利亚的使用情况,澳大利亚医疗安全与质量委员会发布了首个全国性的《急性疼痛临床护理中阿片类镇痛药管理标准》(《阿片类药物管理标准》)。本研究旨在探讨临床医生对《阿片类药物管理标准》实施情况的看法,以了解可能影响这一过程的因素。研究方法对临床医生(包括医生、药剂师、护士和患者安全官员)进行了一对一的定性访谈。访谈指南是根据实施研究综合框架制定的。采用归纳法对访谈记录进行了主题分析,以确定共同的主题。结果共访谈了 32 名临床医生,包括来自澳大利亚 26 个医疗机构的 10 名医生、10 名药剂师和 12 名护士。确定的主题包括(结论临床医生对实施阿片类药物管理标准的看法可归纳为四个主题。本研究的主要发现包括:本地数据对提高组织优先级的重要性、资源可用性和人员配备对提高组织实施阿片类药物监管标准的能力的重要性。未来的研究应评估这些策略对实施工作的影响。摘要医护人员需要卫生系统的更多支持,以提供符合阿片类药物管理标准等政策的医疗服务。医疗系统内的组织应考虑提供人员配置等支持,以满足这些需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinicians’ perspective of the opioid analgesic stewardship in acute pain clinical care standard

Objectives

Opioid analgesics are high-risk medicines, widely used in hospitals to manage pain. To improve the use of opioids in Australia, The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care released the first national Opioid Analgesic Stewardship in Acute Pain Clinical Care Standard (Opioid Stewardship Standard). The objective of this study was to explore clinicians’ perspectives of the implementation of the Opioid Stewardship Standard to understand factors that may impact this process.

Methods

Qualitative one-on-one interviews were conducted with clinicians, including doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and patient safety officers. The interview guide was developed based on the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research. Interview transcriptions were thematically analyzed using an inductive approach to identify common themes.

Results

In total, 32 clinicians were interviewed, including 10 doctors, 10 pharmacists, and 12 nurses from 26 sites across Australia. Themes identified included: (i) Organizational priorities, (ii) organizational capacity for implementation, (iii) changing prescribing practices, and (iv) the Opioid Stewardship Standard.

Conclusions

Clinicians’ perceptions were categorized into four themes regarding the implementation of the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Key findings from this study included the importance of local data to increase organizational prioritization, availability of resources and staffing to increase organizational capacity for implementation to implement the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Future studies should evaluate the impact of such strategies on implementation.

Lay summary

Health professionals need more support from the health system to deliver health care that aligns with policies such as the Opioid Stewardship Standard. Organisations within the health system should consider providing support such as staffing to meet these needs.
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 Policy and Technology
Health Policy and Technology Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
88 days
期刊介绍: Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments. HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology. Topics covered by HPT will include: - Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems - Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches - National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives - Cross-border eHealth including health tourism - The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare - Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies - Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies - Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making - Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in) - Regulation and health economics
×
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