Building the OAChangeMap to improve the service delivery of the New South Wales Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program: a worked example of using a co-design framework.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY Arthritis Care & Research Pub Date : 2024-10-28 DOI:10.1002/acr.25454
Jillian P Eyles, Sarah Kobayashi, Vicky Duong, David J Hunter, Christos Avdalis, Tom Buttel, Greer Dawson, Murillo Dório, Nicole D'Souza, Kirsty Foster, Katherine Maka, Marie K March, Fred Menz, Carin Pratt, Nicole M Rankin, Daniel Richardson, Julia Thompson, Charlotte Strong, Jocelyn L Bowden
{"title":"Building the OAChangeMap to improve the service delivery of the New South Wales Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program: a worked example of using a co-design framework.","authors":"Jillian P Eyles, Sarah Kobayashi, Vicky Duong, David J Hunter, Christos Avdalis, Tom Buttel, Greer Dawson, Murillo Dório, Nicole D'Souza, Kirsty Foster, Katherine Maka, Marie K March, Fred Menz, Carin Pratt, Nicole M Rankin, Daniel Richardson, Julia Thompson, Charlotte Strong, Jocelyn L Bowden","doi":"10.1002/acr.25454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program (OACCP) has been implemented in Australian public hospitals to deliver best-evidence OA care. It is important to ensure that the OACCP continues to deliver evidence-based OA care as intended. We aimed to identify barriers and enablers to delivering the OACCP, prioritise the barriers, and generate strategies to address them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study provides a worked example of a seven-step theory-informed co-design framework. We invited OACCP coordinators to participate in semi-structured interviews (analysed thematically) and complete a questionnaire to identify barriers and enablers to delivery of the OACCP. We then invited a broader group of stakeholders (OACCP coordinators, health managers, policy makers, consumers, researchers) to prioritise the barriers via a short survey (survey 2). We held five co-design workshops where we mapped the priority barriers to the Theoretical Domains Framework and developed strategies to address them.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen coordinators were interviewed and the main barriers identified were: 1. patients often have beliefs that are inconsistent with best-evidence care; 2. there are aspects of clinical care that are not delivered optimally; and 3. system level factors are a barrier to optimal patient care and sustainability of the OACCP. We co-designed a plan for action with patient educational materials, shared decision-making tools, and health professional education and training.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our worked example of co-design used a theory-based, data driven approach with key stakeholders, identified and prioritised barriers to the delivery of the OACCP, acknowledged enablers, and generated a plan for feasible strategies to improve the program.</p>","PeriodicalId":8406,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis Care & Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25454","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program (OACCP) has been implemented in Australian public hospitals to deliver best-evidence OA care. It is important to ensure that the OACCP continues to deliver evidence-based OA care as intended. We aimed to identify barriers and enablers to delivering the OACCP, prioritise the barriers, and generate strategies to address them.

Methods: This study provides a worked example of a seven-step theory-informed co-design framework. We invited OACCP coordinators to participate in semi-structured interviews (analysed thematically) and complete a questionnaire to identify barriers and enablers to delivery of the OACCP. We then invited a broader group of stakeholders (OACCP coordinators, health managers, policy makers, consumers, researchers) to prioritise the barriers via a short survey (survey 2). We held five co-design workshops where we mapped the priority barriers to the Theoretical Domains Framework and developed strategies to address them.

Results: Sixteen coordinators were interviewed and the main barriers identified were: 1. patients often have beliefs that are inconsistent with best-evidence care; 2. there are aspects of clinical care that are not delivered optimally; and 3. system level factors are a barrier to optimal patient care and sustainability of the OACCP. We co-designed a plan for action with patient educational materials, shared decision-making tools, and health professional education and training.

Conclusion: Our worked example of co-design used a theory-based, data driven approach with key stakeholders, identified and prioritised barriers to the delivery of the OACCP, acknowledged enablers, and generated a plan for feasible strategies to improve the program.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建立 OAChangeMap 以改进新南威尔士骨关节炎慢性病护理计划的服务提供:使用共同设计框架的实例。
目的:骨关节炎慢性护理计划(OACCP)已在澳大利亚公立医院实施,以提供最佳循证 OA 护理。重要的是要确保 OACCP 能够继续按照预期提供循证 OA 护理。我们的目标是找出实施 OACCP 的障碍和推动因素,对障碍进行优先排序,并提出解决这些障碍的策略:本研究提供了一个以理论为指导的七步共同设计框架的实例。我们邀请了 OACCP 协调员参加半结构化访谈(按主题进行分析),并填写了一份调查问卷,以确定实施 OACCP 的障碍和促进因素。然后,我们邀请更广泛的利益相关者(OACCP 协调员、卫生管理人员、政策制定者、消费者、研究人员)通过简短的调查(调查 2)确定障碍的优先次序。我们举办了五次共同设计研讨会,将优先障碍与理论领域框架进行了映射,并制定了应对策略:对 16 名协调员进行了访谈,发现的主要障碍有1.患者通常持有与最佳证据护理不一致的观念;2.临床护理的某些方面没有达到最佳效果;3.系统层面的因素阻碍了最佳患者护理和 OACCP 的可持续性。我们共同设计了一项行动计划,其中包括患者教育材料、共同决策工具以及医疗专业人员教育和培训:我们的共同设计实例采用了以理论为基础、数据驱动的方法,与主要利益相关者共同确定了实施 OACCP 的障碍并排定了优先次序,确认了有利因素,并制定了可行的战略计划以改进该计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
368
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthritis Care & Research, an official journal of the American College of Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (a division of the College), is a peer-reviewed publication that publishes original research, review articles, and editorials that promote excellence in the clinical practice of rheumatology. Relevant to the care of individuals with rheumatic diseases, major topics are evidence-based practice studies, clinical problems, practice guidelines, educational, social, and public health issues, health economics, health care policy, and future trends in rheumatology practice.
期刊最新文献
Transcriptional Profiling of Tofacitinib Treatment in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Implications for Treatment Response Prediction. Issue Information Area-level socioeconomic status impacts healthcare visit frequency by Australian inflammatory arthritis patients: results from the Australian Rheumatology Association Database. Building the OAChangeMap to improve the service delivery of the New South Wales Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program: a worked example of using a co-design framework. Comparing Rituximab and Cyclophosphamide in Induction Therapy for Childhood-Onset ANCA-Associated Vasculitis: An ARChiVe registry-cohort study.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1