对两项大型随机对照试验进行过程评估,以了解影响家庭医生使用抗生素审计和反馈报告的因素

IF 8.8 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Implementation Science Pub Date : 2024-09-16 DOI:10.1186/s13012-024-01393-5
Jennifer Shuldiner, Meagan Lacroix, Marianne Saragosa, Catherine Reis, Kevin L. Schwartz, Sharon Gushue, Valerie Leung, Jeremy Grimshaw, Michael Silverman, Kednapa Thavorn, Jerome A. Leis, Michael Kidd, Nick Daneman, Mina Tradous, Bradley Langford, Andrew M. Morris, Jonathan Lam, Gary Garber, Jamie Brehaut, Monica Taljaard, Michelle Greiver, Noah Michael Ivers
{"title":"对两项大型随机对照试验进行过程评估,以了解影响家庭医生使用抗生素审计和反馈报告的因素","authors":"Jennifer Shuldiner, Meagan Lacroix, Marianne Saragosa, Catherine Reis, Kevin L. Schwartz, Sharon Gushue, Valerie Leung, Jeremy Grimshaw, Michael Silverman, Kednapa Thavorn, Jerome A. Leis, Michael Kidd, Nick Daneman, Mina Tradous, Bradley Langford, Andrew M. Morris, Jonathan Lam, Gary Garber, Jamie Brehaut, Monica Taljaard, Michelle Greiver, Noah Michael Ivers","doi":"10.1186/s13012-024-01393-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions in primary care are common and contribute to antimicrobial resistance in the population. Audit and feedback (A&F) on antibiotic prescribing to primary care can improve the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing, but the optimal approach is uncertain. We performed two pragmatic randomized controlled trials of different approaches to audit and feedback. The trial results showed that A&F was associated with significantly reducing antibiotic prescribing. Still, the effect size was small, and the modifications to the A&F interventions tested in the trials were not associated with any change. Herein, we report a theory-informed qualitative process evaluation to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects. Ontario family physicians in the intervention arms of both trials who were sent A&F letters were invited for one-on-one interviews. Purposive sampling was used to seek variation across interested participants in personal and practice characteristics. Qualitative analysis utilized inductive and deductive techniques informed by the Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory. Modifications to the intervention design tested in the trial did not alter prescribing patterns beyond the changes made in response to the A&F overall for various reasons. Change in antibiotic prescribing in response to A&F depended on whether it led to the formation of specific intentions and whether those intentions translated to particular behaviours. Those without intentions to change tended to feel that their unique clinical context was not represented in the A&F. Those with intentions but without specific actions taken tended to express a lack of self-efficacy for avoiding a prescription in contexts with time constraints and/or without an ongoing patient relationship. Many participants noted that compared to overall prescribing, A&F on antibiotic prescription duration was perceived as new information and easily actionable. Our findings indicate that contextual factors, including the types of patients and the setting where they are seen, affect how clinicians react to audit and feedback. These results suggest a need to test tailored feedback reports that reflect the context of how, where, and why physicians prescribe antibiotics so that they might be perceived as more personal and more actionable. Clinical Trial registration IDs: NCT04594200, NCT05044052.","PeriodicalId":54995,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Process evaluation of two large randomized controlled trials to understand factors influencing family physicians’ use of antibiotic audit and feedback reports\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Shuldiner, Meagan Lacroix, Marianne Saragosa, Catherine Reis, Kevin L. Schwartz, Sharon Gushue, Valerie Leung, Jeremy Grimshaw, Michael Silverman, Kednapa Thavorn, Jerome A. Leis, Michael Kidd, Nick Daneman, Mina Tradous, Bradley Langford, Andrew M. Morris, Jonathan Lam, Gary Garber, Jamie Brehaut, Monica Taljaard, Michelle Greiver, Noah Michael Ivers\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13012-024-01393-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions in primary care are common and contribute to antimicrobial resistance in the population. Audit and feedback (A&F) on antibiotic prescribing to primary care can improve the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing, but the optimal approach is uncertain. We performed two pragmatic randomized controlled trials of different approaches to audit and feedback. The trial results showed that A&F was associated with significantly reducing antibiotic prescribing. Still, the effect size was small, and the modifications to the A&F interventions tested in the trials were not associated with any change. Herein, we report a theory-informed qualitative process evaluation to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects. Ontario family physicians in the intervention arms of both trials who were sent A&F letters were invited for one-on-one interviews. Purposive sampling was used to seek variation across interested participants in personal and practice characteristics. Qualitative analysis utilized inductive and deductive techniques informed by the Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory. Modifications to the intervention design tested in the trial did not alter prescribing patterns beyond the changes made in response to the A&F overall for various reasons. Change in antibiotic prescribing in response to A&F depended on whether it led to the formation of specific intentions and whether those intentions translated to particular behaviours. Those without intentions to change tended to feel that their unique clinical context was not represented in the A&F. Those with intentions but without specific actions taken tended to express a lack of self-efficacy for avoiding a prescription in contexts with time constraints and/or without an ongoing patient relationship. Many participants noted that compared to overall prescribing, A&F on antibiotic prescription duration was perceived as new information and easily actionable. Our findings indicate that contextual factors, including the types of patients and the setting where they are seen, affect how clinicians react to audit and feedback. These results suggest a need to test tailored feedback reports that reflect the context of how, where, and why physicians prescribe antibiotics so that they might be perceived as more personal and more actionable. Clinical Trial registration IDs: NCT04594200, NCT05044052.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54995,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation Science\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01393-5\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01393-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基层医疗机构开具不必要的抗生素处方的现象很普遍,这也是导致人群产生抗菌药耐药性的原因之一。对基层医疗机构的抗生素处方进行审核和反馈(A&F)可以提高抗生素处方的合理性,但最佳方法尚不确定。我们对审计和反馈的不同方法进行了两项务实的随机对照试验。试验结果表明,审核与反馈可显著减少抗生素处方。不过,效果规模很小,而且试验中对 A&F 干预方法的修改也没有带来任何变化。在此,我们报告了一项以理论为依据的定性过程评估,以探索观察到的效果背后的潜在机制。我们邀请两项试验干预组中收到 A&F 信件的安大略家庭医生进行一对一访谈。采用了有目的的抽样,以寻求感兴趣的参与者在个人和实践特征方面的差异。定性分析采用了以临床表现反馈干预理论为基础的归纳和演绎技术。由于各种原因,对试验中测试的干预设计进行的修改并没有改变处方模式,超出了对 A&F 整体反应所做的改变。抗生素处方根据 A&F 而发生的变化取决于 A&F 是否促成了特定意图的形成,以及这些意图是否转化为特定行为。那些没有改变意图的人往往认为,他们独特的临床背景在 A&F 中没有得到体现。那些有意愿但没有采取具体行动的人往往表示缺乏在时间有限和/或没有持续病人关系的情况下避免处方的自我效能感。许多参与者指出,与总体处方相比,关于抗生素处方持续时间的 A&F 被视为新信息,很容易采取行动。我们的研究结果表明,环境因素(包括患者类型和就诊环境)会影响临床医生对审核和反馈的反应。这些结果表明,有必要测试量身定制的反馈报告,以反映医生开抗生素处方的方式、地点和原因,从而使这些报告被视为更个性化、更具可操作性。临床试验注册编号:NCT04594200、NCT05044052。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Process evaluation of two large randomized controlled trials to understand factors influencing family physicians’ use of antibiotic audit and feedback reports
Unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions in primary care are common and contribute to antimicrobial resistance in the population. Audit and feedback (A&F) on antibiotic prescribing to primary care can improve the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing, but the optimal approach is uncertain. We performed two pragmatic randomized controlled trials of different approaches to audit and feedback. The trial results showed that A&F was associated with significantly reducing antibiotic prescribing. Still, the effect size was small, and the modifications to the A&F interventions tested in the trials were not associated with any change. Herein, we report a theory-informed qualitative process evaluation to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects. Ontario family physicians in the intervention arms of both trials who were sent A&F letters were invited for one-on-one interviews. Purposive sampling was used to seek variation across interested participants in personal and practice characteristics. Qualitative analysis utilized inductive and deductive techniques informed by the Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory. Modifications to the intervention design tested in the trial did not alter prescribing patterns beyond the changes made in response to the A&F overall for various reasons. Change in antibiotic prescribing in response to A&F depended on whether it led to the formation of specific intentions and whether those intentions translated to particular behaviours. Those without intentions to change tended to feel that their unique clinical context was not represented in the A&F. Those with intentions but without specific actions taken tended to express a lack of self-efficacy for avoiding a prescription in contexts with time constraints and/or without an ongoing patient relationship. Many participants noted that compared to overall prescribing, A&F on antibiotic prescription duration was perceived as new information and easily actionable. Our findings indicate that contextual factors, including the types of patients and the setting where they are seen, affect how clinicians react to audit and feedback. These results suggest a need to test tailored feedback reports that reflect the context of how, where, and why physicians prescribe antibiotics so that they might be perceived as more personal and more actionable. Clinical Trial registration IDs: NCT04594200, NCT05044052.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Implementation Science
Implementation Science 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
14.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
78
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Implementation Science is a leading journal committed to disseminating evidence on methods for integrating research findings into routine healthcare practice and policy. It offers a multidisciplinary platform for studying implementation strategies, encompassing their development, outcomes, economics, processes, and associated factors. The journal prioritizes rigorous studies and innovative, theory-based approaches, covering implementation science across various healthcare services and settings.
期刊最新文献
Training and education provided to local change champions within implementation trials: a rapid systematic review. Assessing the comparative effectiveness of ECHO and coaching implementation strategies in a jail/provider MOUD implementation trial. Looking under the hood of a hybrid two-way texting intervention to improve early retention on antiretroviral therapy in Malawi: an implementation fidelity evaluation. Improving the adoption of a school-based nutrition program: findings from a collaborative network of randomised trials. Finding the right dose: a scoping review examining facilitation as an implementation strategy for evidence-based stroke care.
×
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