From sensitization to adoption? A qualitative study of the implementation of a digitally supported intervention for clinical decision making in polypharmacy
-
Published:2020-09-21
Issue:1
Volume:15
Page:
-
ISSN:1748-5908
-
Container-title:Implementation Science
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Implementation Sci
Author:
Söling SaraORCID, Köberlein-Neu Juliane, Müller Beate Sigrid, Dinh Truc Sophia, Muth Christiane, Pfaff Holger, Karbach Ute, Kellermann-Mühlhoff Petra, Düvel Lara, Beckmann Till, Hammerschmidt Reinhard, Jachmich Julia, Leicher Eva, Brandt Benjamin, Richard Johanna, Meyer Frank, Flume Mathias, Müller Thomas, Gerlach Ferdinand M., Gonzalez-Gonzalez Ana Isabel, Chapidi Kiran, Brünn Robin, Ihle Peter, Meyer Ingo, Timmesfeld Nina, Trampisch Hans J., Klaaßen-Mielke Renate, Basten Jale, Greiner Wolfgang, Suhrmann Bastian, Piotrowski Alexandra, Beifuß Karolina, Meyer Sarah, Grandt Daniel, Grandt Simone,
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
Formative evaluation of the implementation process for a digitally supported intervention in polypharmacy in Germany. Qualitative research was conducted within a cluster randomized controlled trial (C-RCT). It focused on understanding how the intervention influences behavior-related outcomes in the prescription and medication review process.
Methods/setting
Twenty-seven general practitioners (GPs) were included in the study in the two groups of the C-RCT, the intervention, and the wait list control group. Behavior-related outcomes were investigated using three-step data analysis (content analytic approach, documentary method, and design of a model of implementation pathways).
Results
Content analysis showed that physicians were more intensely aware of polypharmacy-related risks, described positive learning effects of the digital technology on their prescribing behavior, and perceived a change in communication with patients and pharmacists. Conversely, they felt uncertain about their own responsibility when prescribing. Three main dimensions were discovered which influenced adoption behavior: (1) the physicians’ interpretation of the relevance of pharmaceutical knowledge provided by the intervention in changing decision-making situations in polypharmacy; (2) their medical code of ethics for clinical decision making in the context of progressing digitalization; and (3) their concepts of evidence-based medicine on the basis of professional experiences with polypharmacy in primary care settings. In our sample, both simple and complex pathways from sensitization to adoption were observed. The resulting model on adoption behavior includes a paradigmatic description of different pathways and a visualization of different observed levels and applied methodological approaches. We assumed that the GP habitus can weaken or strengthen interventional effects towards intervention uptake. This formative evaluation strategy is beneficial for the identification of behavior-related implementation barriers and facilitators.
Conclusion
Our analyses of the adoption behavior of a digitally supported intervention in polypharmacy revealed both simple and complex pathways from awareness to adoption, which may impact the implementation of the intervention and therefore, its effectiveness. Future consideration of adoption behavior in the planning and evaluation of digitally supported interventions may enhance uptake and support the interpretation of effects.
Trial registration
NCT03430336, 12 February 2018.
Funder
Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss Innovationsfonds
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Informatics,Health Policy,General Medicine
Reference34 articles.
1. Molokhia M, Majeed A. Current and future perspectives on the management of polypharmacy. BMC Fam Pract. 2017;18(1):70 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-017-0642-0. 2. Masnoon N, Shakib S, Kalisch-Ellett L, et al. What is polypharmacy? A systematic review of definitions. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:230 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0621-2. 3. Mortazavi SS, Shati M, Keshtkar A, Malakouti SK, Bazargan M, Assari S. Defining polypharmacy in the elderly: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open. 2016;6 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010989. 4. Meulendijk M, Spruit M, Drenth-van Maanen C, et al. General practitioners’ attitudes towards decision-supported prescribing: an analysis of the Dutch primary care sector. Health Informatics J. 2013;19(4):247–63 https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458212472333. 5. Clyne B, Bradley MC, Hughes C, et al. Electronic prescribing and other forms of technology to reduce inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy in older people: a review of current evidence. Clin Geriatr Med. 2012;28(2):301–22 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cger.2012.01.009.
Cited by
7 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
|
|