Nicola McCleary, Celia Laur, Justin Presseau, Gail Dobell, Jonathan M C Lam, Sharon Gushue, Katie Hagel, Lindsay Bevan, Lena Salach, Laura Desveaux, Noah M Ivers
{"title":"揭示医疗质量改善干预措施的因果假设和有效成分:在初级保健阿片类药物处方中的应用。","authors":"Nicola McCleary, Celia Laur, Justin Presseau, Gail Dobell, Jonathan M C Lam, Sharon Gushue, Katie Hagel, Lindsay Bevan, Lena Salach, Laura Desveaux, Noah M Ivers","doi":"10.1177/26334895231206569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Efforts to maximize the impact of healthcare improvement interventions are hampered when intervention components are not well defined or described, precluding the ability to understand how and why interventions are expected to work.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We partnered with two organizations delivering province-wide quality improvement interventions to establish how they envisaged their interventions lead to change (their underlying causal assumptions) and to identify active ingredients (behavior change techniques [BCTs]). The interventions assessed were an audit and feedback report and an academic detailing program. Both focused on supporting safer opioid prescribing in primary care in Ontario, Canada. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with intervention developers (<i>n</i> = 8) and a content analysis of intervention documents. Analyses unpacked and articulated how the interventions were intended to achieve change and how this was operationalized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Developers anticipated that the feedback report would provide physicians with a clear understanding of their own prescribing patterns in comparison to others. In the feedback report, we found an emphasis on BCTs consistent with that assumption (<i>feedback on behavior</i>; <i>social comparison</i>). The detailing was designed to provide tailored support to enable physicians to overcome barriers to change and to gradually enact specific practice changes for patients based on improved communication. In the detailing materials, we found an emphasis on <i>instructions on how to perform the behavior</i>, for a range of behaviors (e.g., tapering opioids, treating opioid use disorder). The materials were supplemented by detailer-enacted BCTs (e.g., <i>social support [practical]</i>; <i>goal setting [behavior]</i>; <i>review behavioral goal[s]</i>).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The interventions included a small range of BCTs addressing various clinical behaviors. This work provides a methodological example of how to apply a behavioral lens to surface the active ingredients, target clinical behaviors, and causal assumptions of existing large-scale improvement interventions that could be applied in other contexts to optimize effectiveness and facilitate scale and spread.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":"4 ","pages":"26334895231206569"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10624081/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surfacing the causal assumptions and active ingredients of healthcare quality improvement interventions: An application to primary care opioid prescribing.\",\"authors\":\"Nicola McCleary, Celia Laur, Justin Presseau, Gail Dobell, Jonathan M C Lam, Sharon Gushue, Katie Hagel, Lindsay Bevan, Lena Salach, Laura Desveaux, Noah M Ivers\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26334895231206569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Efforts to maximize the impact of healthcare improvement interventions are hampered when intervention components are not well defined or described, precluding the ability to understand how and why interventions are expected to work.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We partnered with two organizations delivering province-wide quality improvement interventions to establish how they envisaged their interventions lead to change (their underlying causal assumptions) and to identify active ingredients (behavior change techniques [BCTs]). The interventions assessed were an audit and feedback report and an academic detailing program. Both focused on supporting safer opioid prescribing in primary care in Ontario, Canada. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with intervention developers (<i>n</i> = 8) and a content analysis of intervention documents. Analyses unpacked and articulated how the interventions were intended to achieve change and how this was operationalized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Developers anticipated that the feedback report would provide physicians with a clear understanding of their own prescribing patterns in comparison to others. In the feedback report, we found an emphasis on BCTs consistent with that assumption (<i>feedback on behavior</i>; <i>social comparison</i>). The detailing was designed to provide tailored support to enable physicians to overcome barriers to change and to gradually enact specific practice changes for patients based on improved communication. In the detailing materials, we found an emphasis on <i>instructions on how to perform the behavior</i>, for a range of behaviors (e.g., tapering opioids, treating opioid use disorder). The materials were supplemented by detailer-enacted BCTs (e.g., <i>social support [practical]</i>; <i>goal setting [behavior]</i>; <i>review behavioral goal[s]</i>).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The interventions included a small range of BCTs addressing various clinical behaviors. This work provides a methodological example of how to apply a behavioral lens to surface the active ingredients, target clinical behaviors, and causal assumptions of existing large-scale improvement interventions that could be applied in other contexts to optimize effectiveness and facilitate scale and spread.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation research and practice\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"26334895231206569\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10624081/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation research and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231206569\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231206569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Surfacing the causal assumptions and active ingredients of healthcare quality improvement interventions: An application to primary care opioid prescribing.
Background: Efforts to maximize the impact of healthcare improvement interventions are hampered when intervention components are not well defined or described, precluding the ability to understand how and why interventions are expected to work.
Method: We partnered with two organizations delivering province-wide quality improvement interventions to establish how they envisaged their interventions lead to change (their underlying causal assumptions) and to identify active ingredients (behavior change techniques [BCTs]). The interventions assessed were an audit and feedback report and an academic detailing program. Both focused on supporting safer opioid prescribing in primary care in Ontario, Canada. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with intervention developers (n = 8) and a content analysis of intervention documents. Analyses unpacked and articulated how the interventions were intended to achieve change and how this was operationalized.
Results: Developers anticipated that the feedback report would provide physicians with a clear understanding of their own prescribing patterns in comparison to others. In the feedback report, we found an emphasis on BCTs consistent with that assumption (feedback on behavior; social comparison). The detailing was designed to provide tailored support to enable physicians to overcome barriers to change and to gradually enact specific practice changes for patients based on improved communication. In the detailing materials, we found an emphasis on instructions on how to perform the behavior, for a range of behaviors (e.g., tapering opioids, treating opioid use disorder). The materials were supplemented by detailer-enacted BCTs (e.g., social support [practical]; goal setting [behavior]; review behavioral goal[s]).
Conclusions: The interventions included a small range of BCTs addressing various clinical behaviors. This work provides a methodological example of how to apply a behavioral lens to surface the active ingredients, target clinical behaviors, and causal assumptions of existing large-scale improvement interventions that could be applied in other contexts to optimize effectiveness and facilitate scale and spread.