Khushbu Khatri Park, Larry Hearld, Reena Joseph Kelly, Jasvinder A Singh
{"title":"Clinic personnel attitudes and baseline implementation outcomes of a lupus decision aid.","authors":"Khushbu Khatri Park, Larry Hearld, Reena Joseph Kelly, Jasvinder A Singh","doi":"10.1080/13548506.2024.2407448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To examine the association between clinical personnel's general attitudes towards new interventions and implementation outcomes related to an evidence-based individualized, culturally tailored, computerized decision aid (DA) for the management of lupus. To assess attitudes, the validated Evidence-Based Practice Attitudes Scale (EBPAS) survey was emailed to personnel in 15 rheumatology clinics across the U.S. The survey also included questions related to three validated implementation outcomes: lupus DA acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. The baseline round of the survey was fielded from August 2019 to January 2020 and yielded a 56.8% response rate (<i>n</i> = 76 respondents). We also collected organizational characteristics from each clinic and personnel-level control variables. Overall, respondents reported modest levels of lupus DA acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility (3.54, 3.45 and 3.40, respectively, on a scale of 1-5). Multilevel regression analyses demonstrated statistically significant positive relationships between a respondent's openness to new practices/interventions and perceived lupus DA acceptability (β = 0.31, <i>p</i> < .01) and feasibility (β = 0.28, <i>p</i> < .05). Divergence (a respondent's perceived difference between current and new practices) was not associated with clinic personnel perceptions of the DA. These findings suggest that understanding clinic personnel general attitudes toward new interventions is an important precursor to implementing evidence-based practices and may provide important diagnostic information about places to intervene in preparation for implementation and improving shared decision-making with patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":54535,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Health & Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1835-1847"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Health & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2024.2407448","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
To examine the association between clinical personnel's general attitudes towards new interventions and implementation outcomes related to an evidence-based individualized, culturally tailored, computerized decision aid (DA) for the management of lupus. To assess attitudes, the validated Evidence-Based Practice Attitudes Scale (EBPAS) survey was emailed to personnel in 15 rheumatology clinics across the U.S. The survey also included questions related to three validated implementation outcomes: lupus DA acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. The baseline round of the survey was fielded from August 2019 to January 2020 and yielded a 56.8% response rate (n = 76 respondents). We also collected organizational characteristics from each clinic and personnel-level control variables. Overall, respondents reported modest levels of lupus DA acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility (3.54, 3.45 and 3.40, respectively, on a scale of 1-5). Multilevel regression analyses demonstrated statistically significant positive relationships between a respondent's openness to new practices/interventions and perceived lupus DA acceptability (β = 0.31, p < .01) and feasibility (β = 0.28, p < .05). Divergence (a respondent's perceived difference between current and new practices) was not associated with clinic personnel perceptions of the DA. These findings suggest that understanding clinic personnel general attitudes toward new interventions is an important precursor to implementing evidence-based practices and may provide important diagnostic information about places to intervene in preparation for implementation and improving shared decision-making with patients.
期刊介绍:
Psychology, Health & Medicine is a multidisciplinary journal highlighting human factors in health. The journal provides a peer reviewed forum to report on issues of psychology and health in practice. This key publication reaches an international audience, highlighting the variation and similarities within different settings and exploring multiple health and illness issues from theoretical, practical and management perspectives. It provides a critical forum to examine the wide range of applied health and illness issues and how they incorporate psychological knowledge, understanding, theory and intervention. The journal reflects the growing recognition of psychosocial issues as they affect health planning, medical care, disease reaction, intervention, quality of life, adjustment adaptation and management.
For many years theoretical research was very distant from applied understanding. The emerging movement in health psychology, changes in medical care provision and training, and consumer awareness of health issues all contribute to a growing need for applied research. This journal focuses on practical applications of theory, research and experience and provides a bridge between academic knowledge, illness experience, wellbeing and health care practice.