在初级保健中实施数字干预以管理不受控制的高血压:混合方法过程评估。

Kate Morton, Laura Dennison, Rebecca Band, Beth Stuart, Laura Wilde, Tara Cheetham-Blake, Elena Heber, Joanna Slodkowska-Barabasz, Paul Little, Richard J McManus, Carl R May, Lucy Yardley, Katherine Bradbury
{"title":"在初级保健中实施数字干预以管理不受控制的高血压:混合方法过程评估。","authors":"Kate Morton, Laura Dennison, Rebecca Band, Beth Stuart, Laura Wilde, Tara Cheetham-Blake, Elena Heber, Joanna Slodkowska-Barabasz, Paul Little, Richard J McManus, Carl R May, Lucy Yardley, Katherine Bradbury","doi":"10.1186/s13012-021-01123-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A high proportion of hypertensive patients remain above the target threshold for blood pressure, increasing the risk of adverse health outcomes. A digital intervention to facilitate healthcare practitioners (hereafter practitioners) to initiate planned medication escalations when patients' home readings were raised was found to be effective in lowering blood pressure over 12 months. This mixed-methods process evaluation aimed to develop a detailed understanding of how the intervention was implemented in Primary Care, possible mechanisms of action and contextual factors influencing implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred twenty-five practitioners took part in a randomised controlled trial, including GPs, practice nurses, nurse-prescribers, and healthcare assistants. Usage data were collected automatically by the digital intervention and antihypertensive medication changes were recorded from the patients' medical notes. A sub-sample of 27 practitioners took part in semi-structured qualitative process interviews. The qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis and the quantitative data using descriptive statistics and correlations to explore factors related to adherence. The two sets of findings were integrated using a triangulation protocol.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean practitioner adherence to escalating medication was moderate (53%), and the qualitative analysis suggested that low trust in home readings and the decision to wait for more evidence influenced implementation for some practitioners. The logic model was partially supported in that self-efficacy was related to adherence to medication escalation, but qualitative findings provided further insight into additional potential mechanisms, including perceived necessity and concerns. Contextual factors influencing implementation included proximity of average readings to the target threshold. Meanwhile, adherence to delivering remote support was mixed, and practitioners described some uncertainty when they received no response from patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This mixed-methods process evaluation provided novel insights into practitioners' decision-making around escalating medication using a digital algorithm. Implementation strategies were proposed which could benefit digital interventions in addressing clinical inertia, including facilitating tracking of patients' readings over time to provide stronger evidence for medication escalation, and allowing more flexibility in decision-making whilst discouraging clinical inertia due to borderline readings. Implementation of one-way notification systems could be facilitated by enabling patients to send a brief acknowledgement response.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>( ISRCTN13790648 ). Registered 14 May 2015.</p>","PeriodicalId":417097,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science : IS","volume":" ","pages":"57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8152066/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing a digital intervention for managing uncontrolled hypertension in Primary Care: a mixed methods process evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Kate Morton, Laura Dennison, Rebecca Band, Beth Stuart, Laura Wilde, Tara Cheetham-Blake, Elena Heber, Joanna Slodkowska-Barabasz, Paul Little, Richard J McManus, Carl R May, Lucy Yardley, Katherine Bradbury\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13012-021-01123-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A high proportion of hypertensive patients remain above the target threshold for blood pressure, increasing the risk of adverse health outcomes. A digital intervention to facilitate healthcare practitioners (hereafter practitioners) to initiate planned medication escalations when patients' home readings were raised was found to be effective in lowering blood pressure over 12 months. This mixed-methods process evaluation aimed to develop a detailed understanding of how the intervention was implemented in Primary Care, possible mechanisms of action and contextual factors influencing implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred twenty-five practitioners took part in a randomised controlled trial, including GPs, practice nurses, nurse-prescribers, and healthcare assistants. Usage data were collected automatically by the digital intervention and antihypertensive medication changes were recorded from the patients' medical notes. A sub-sample of 27 practitioners took part in semi-structured qualitative process interviews. The qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis and the quantitative data using descriptive statistics and correlations to explore factors related to adherence. The two sets of findings were integrated using a triangulation protocol.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean practitioner adherence to escalating medication was moderate (53%), and the qualitative analysis suggested that low trust in home readings and the decision to wait for more evidence influenced implementation for some practitioners. The logic model was partially supported in that self-efficacy was related to adherence to medication escalation, but qualitative findings provided further insight into additional potential mechanisms, including perceived necessity and concerns. Contextual factors influencing implementation included proximity of average readings to the target threshold. Meanwhile, adherence to delivering remote support was mixed, and practitioners described some uncertainty when they received no response from patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This mixed-methods process evaluation provided novel insights into practitioners' decision-making around escalating medication using a digital algorithm. Implementation strategies were proposed which could benefit digital interventions in addressing clinical inertia, including facilitating tracking of patients' readings over time to provide stronger evidence for medication escalation, and allowing more flexibility in decision-making whilst discouraging clinical inertia due to borderline readings. Implementation of one-way notification systems could be facilitated by enabling patients to send a brief acknowledgement response.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>( ISRCTN13790648 ). Registered 14 May 2015.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":417097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation Science : IS\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8152066/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation Science : IS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01123-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science : IS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01123-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:高比例的高血压患者血压仍然高于目标阈值,增加了不良健康结局的风险。当患者的家庭读数升高时,一项数字干预措施有助于医疗保健从业者(以下简称从业者)启动计划中的药物升级,发现在12个月内有效降低血压。这种混合方法的过程评估旨在详细了解干预措施是如何在初级保健中实施的,可能的作用机制和影响实施的背景因素。方法:125名从业人员参加了一项随机对照试验,包括全科医生、执业护士、护士开处方者和医疗助理。通过数字干预自动收集使用数据,并从患者的医疗记录中记录降压药物的变化。27名从业人员的子样本参加了半结构化定性过程访谈。定性数据采用专题分析,定量数据采用描述性统计和相关性分析,以探讨与依从性相关的因素。使用三角测量协议将两组结果整合在一起。结果:从业人员对升级药物的平均依从性中等(53%),定性分析表明,对家庭读数的低信任度和等待更多证据的决定影响了一些从业人员的实施。自我效能感与药物升级依从性有关,这一逻辑模型得到了部分支持,但定性研究结果进一步深入了解了其他潜在机制,包括感知到的必要性和担忧。影响实施的环境因素包括平均读数与目标阈值的接近程度。同时,对提供远程支持的依从性参差不齐,当医生没有收到患者的回应时,他们描述了一些不确定性。结论:这种混合方法的过程评估为从业人员在使用数字算法升级药物的决策提供了新的见解。提出了实施策略,可以使数字干预在解决临床惯性方面受益,包括促进跟踪患者随时间的读数,为药物升级提供更有力的证据,并允许更大的决策灵活性,同时阻止由于边缘读数导致的临床惯性。通过允许患者发送简短的确认回复,可以促进单向通知系统的实施。试验注册:(ISRCTN13790648)。2015年5月14日注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Implementing a digital intervention for managing uncontrolled hypertension in Primary Care: a mixed methods process evaluation.

Implementing a digital intervention for managing uncontrolled hypertension in Primary Care: a mixed methods process evaluation.

Implementing a digital intervention for managing uncontrolled hypertension in Primary Care: a mixed methods process evaluation.

Background: A high proportion of hypertensive patients remain above the target threshold for blood pressure, increasing the risk of adverse health outcomes. A digital intervention to facilitate healthcare practitioners (hereafter practitioners) to initiate planned medication escalations when patients' home readings were raised was found to be effective in lowering blood pressure over 12 months. This mixed-methods process evaluation aimed to develop a detailed understanding of how the intervention was implemented in Primary Care, possible mechanisms of action and contextual factors influencing implementation.

Methods: One hundred twenty-five practitioners took part in a randomised controlled trial, including GPs, practice nurses, nurse-prescribers, and healthcare assistants. Usage data were collected automatically by the digital intervention and antihypertensive medication changes were recorded from the patients' medical notes. A sub-sample of 27 practitioners took part in semi-structured qualitative process interviews. The qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis and the quantitative data using descriptive statistics and correlations to explore factors related to adherence. The two sets of findings were integrated using a triangulation protocol.

Results: Mean practitioner adherence to escalating medication was moderate (53%), and the qualitative analysis suggested that low trust in home readings and the decision to wait for more evidence influenced implementation for some practitioners. The logic model was partially supported in that self-efficacy was related to adherence to medication escalation, but qualitative findings provided further insight into additional potential mechanisms, including perceived necessity and concerns. Contextual factors influencing implementation included proximity of average readings to the target threshold. Meanwhile, adherence to delivering remote support was mixed, and practitioners described some uncertainty when they received no response from patients.

Conclusions: This mixed-methods process evaluation provided novel insights into practitioners' decision-making around escalating medication using a digital algorithm. Implementation strategies were proposed which could benefit digital interventions in addressing clinical inertia, including facilitating tracking of patients' readings over time to provide stronger evidence for medication escalation, and allowing more flexibility in decision-making whilst discouraging clinical inertia due to borderline readings. Implementation of one-way notification systems could be facilitated by enabling patients to send a brief acknowledgement response.

Trial registration: ( ISRCTN13790648 ). Registered 14 May 2015.

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
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