Abstract
Abstract
Background
There is limited evidence on how to implement shared decision-making (SDM) interventions in routine practice. We conducted a qualitative study, embedded within a 2 × 2 factorial cluster randomized controlled trial, to assess the acceptability and feasibility of two interventions for facilitating SDM about contraceptive methods in primary care and family planning clinics. The two SDM interventions comprised a patient-targeted intervention (video and prompt card) and a provider-targeted intervention (encounter decision aids and training).
Methods
Participants were clinical and administrative staff aged 18 years or older who worked in one of the 12 clinics in the intervention arm, had email access, and consented to being audio-recorded. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted upon completion of the trial. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim. Data collection and thematic analysis were informed by the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework, which are relevant to the successful implementation of provider behaviour change interventions.
Results
Interviews (n = 29) indicated that the interventions were not systematically implemented in the majority of clinics. Participants felt the interventions were aligned with their role and they had confidence in their skills to use the decision aids. However, the novelty of the interventions, especially a need to modify workflows and change behavior to use them with patients, were implementation challenges. The interventions were not deeply embedded in clinic routines and their use was threatened by lack of understanding of their purpose and effect, and staff absence or turnover. Participants from clinics that had an enthusiastic study champion or team-based organizational culture found these social supports had a positive role in implementing the interventions.
Conclusions
Variation in capabilities and motivation among clinical and administrative staff, coupled with inconsistent use of the interventions in routine workflow contributed to suboptimal implementation of the interventions. Future trials may benefit by using implementation strategies that embed SDM in the organizational culture of clinical settings.
Funder
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Insitute
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Informatics,Health Policy,General Medicine
Reference34 articles.
1. Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A. What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):780–2.
2. World Health Organization. Ensuring human rights in the provision of contraceptive information and services: guidance and recommendations [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014. Available from:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK195054/
3. Dehlendorf C, Grumbach K, Schmittdiel JA, Steinauer J. Shared decision making in contraceptive counseling. Contraception. 2017;95(5):452–5.
4. Chen M, Lindley A, Kimport K, Dehlendorf C. An in-depth analysis of the use of shared decision making in contraceptive counseling. Contraception. 2019 Mar;99(3):187–91.
5. Washington State. Providing high quality, affordable health care to Washingtonians based on the recommendations of the blue ribbon commission on health care costs and access [Internet]. E2S SB 5930 2007. Available from:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5930&year=2007
. Accessed 3 Aug 2015.
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献