Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a persistent inflammatory condition impacting the brain and spinal cord, affecting globally approximately 2.8 million individuals. Effective self-management... Show moreBackground: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a persistent inflammatory condition impacting the brain and spinal cord, affecting globally approximately 2.8 million individuals. Effective self-management plays a crucial role in the treatment of chronic diseases, including MS, significantly influencing health outcomes. A personal health record (PHR) is a promising tool to support self-management, potentially empowering patients and enhancing their engagement in treatment and health. Despite these promising aspects, challenges in implementation persist and PHRs are still a relatively new concept undergoing rapid development.Objective: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and usability of the PHR. Secondary objectives included evaluating implementation determinants, and exploring preliminary effects on quality of care for both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs), self-management, self-efficacy for patients, job satisfaction, efficiency, and demand for HCPs, and preliminary effects on costs and health-related quality of life.Methods: This study had a mixed-methods design. Quantitative data of patients (n = 80) and HCPs (n = 12) were collected via self-reported questionnaires at baseline (T0), after one year (T1), and after two years (T2). One focus group interview was conducted at T2 with patients (n = 7), and another one with HCPs (n = 4), to get a more in-depth understanding of the feasibility and usability of the PHR via the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology framework, and to further explore the secondary objectives in-depth.Results: Most patients never logged in during the first year and logged in a couple of times per year during the second year, averaging around 15 min per log-in session. The HCPs mainly logged in a couple of times per year over the two years with an average use of six minutes per session. Patient usability and satisfaction scores were below average and moderate, respectively: with SUS-scores of 59.9 (SD = 14.2, n = 33) at T1 and 59.0 (SD = 16.3, n = 37) at T2, and CSQ-8 scores of 21.4 (SD = 5.0, n = 34) at T1, and 22.1 (SD = 5.0, n = 39) at T2. HCPs had similar usability and satisfaction scores. Multiple facilitators and barriers were identified by both patients and HCPs, such as (in)sufficient knowledge of how to use the PHR, lack of staff capacity and ICT obstacles. No significant differences were found in the preliminary effects. Qualitative data showed, among others, that both patients and HCPs saw the benefit of the PHR in terms of performance expectancy, by gaining more insight into health and health data, but challenges remained regarding effort expectancy, such as log-in issues and experiencing difficulties with information retrieval.Conclusion: The feasibility and usability were considered moderate by patients and HCPs; however, potential regarding the performance of the PHR was observed. Implementation challenges, such as the complexity of usage, lowered the adoption of the PHR. The evolving nature of PHRs requires ongoing evaluation and adaptation to optimize their potential benefits. Utilizing a participatory design approach and a dedicated implementation team could help in achieving this optimization, ultimately enhancing their adoption. Show less
Schnoor, K.; Talboom-Kamp, E.P.W.A.; Hajti, M.; Chavannes, N.H.; Versluis, A. 2024
Background: Health care lags in digital transformation, despite the potential of technology to improve the well-being of individuals. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the uptake of technology... Show moreBackground: Health care lags in digital transformation, despite the potential of technology to improve the well-being of individuals. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the uptake of technology in health care and increased individuals' willingness to perform self-management using technology. A web-based service, Directlab Online, provides consumers with direct digital access to diagnostic test packages, which can digitally support the self-management of health. Objective: This study aims to identify the facilitators, barriers, and needs of Directlab Online, a self-management service for web-based access to diagnostic testing. Methods: A qualitative method was used from a potential user's perspective. The needs and future needs for, facilitators of, and barriers to the use of Directlab Online were evaluated. Semistructured focus group meetings were conducted in 2022. Two focus groups were focused on sexually transmitted infection test packages and 2 were focused on prevention test packages. Data analysis was performed according to the principles of the Framework Method. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to categorize the facilitators and barriers. Results: In total, 19 participants, with a mean age of 34.32 (SD 14.70) years, participated in the focus groups. Important barriers were a lack of privacy information, too much and difficult information, and a commercial appearance. Important facilitators were the right amount of information, the right kind of tests, and the involvement of a health care professional. The need for a service such as Directlab Online was to ensure its availability for users' health and to maintain their health. Conclusions: According to the participants, facilitators and barriers were comprehension of the information, the goal of the website, and the overall appearance of the service. Although the service was developed in cocreation with health care professionals and users, the needs did not align. The users preferred understandable and adequate, but not excessive, information. In addition, they preferred other types of tests to be available on the service. For future research, it would be beneficial to focus on cocreation between the involved medical professionals and users to develop, improve, and implement a service such as Directlab Online. Show less
Background Lifestyle intervention programmes target behavioural risk factors that contribute to cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Unfortunately, sustainable implementation of these programmes can be... Show moreBackground Lifestyle intervention programmes target behavioural risk factors that contribute to cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Unfortunately, sustainable implementation of these programmes can be challenging. Gaining insights into the barriers and facilitators for successful implementation is important for maximising public health impact of these interventions. The Healthy Heart (HH) programme is an example of a combined lifestyle intervention programme.Aim To analyse the reach, adoption, and implementation of the HH programme.Design & setting A mixed-methods study conducted in a general practice setting in The Netherlands.Method Quantitative data were collected from the Healthy Heart study (HH study), a non-randomised cluster stepped-wedge trial to assess the effect of the HH programme on patients at high risk of developing CVDs at practice level. Qualitative data were obtained through focus groups.Results Out of 73 approached general practices, 55 implemented the HH programme. A total of 1082 patients agreed to participate in the HH study, of whom 64 patients were referred to the HH programme and 41 patients participated. Several barriers for participation were identified such as time investment, lack of risk perception, and being confident in changing lifestyle on their own. Important barriers for healthcare providers (HCPs) to refer a patient were time investment, lack of information to sufficiently inform patients, and preconceived notions regarding which patients the programme was suitable for.Conclusion This study has offered insights from a patient and HCP perspective regarding barriers and facilitators for implementation of the group-based lifestyle intervention programme. The identified barriers and facilitators, and the suggested improvements, can be used by others who wish to implement a similar programme. Show less
Veen, L.E.J. van; Weijden, B.M. van der; Bodegom-Vos, L. van; Hol, J.; Visser, D.H.; Achten, N.B.; Plötz, F.B. 2023
Prior studies demonstrated the neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) calculator’s potential in drastically reducing antibiotic prescriptions, and its international adoption is increasing rapidly. To... Show morePrior studies demonstrated the neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) calculator’s potential in drastically reducing antibiotic prescriptions, and its international adoption is increasing rapidly. To optimize the EOS calculator’s impact, successful implementation is crucial. This study aimed to identify key barriers and facilitators to inform an implementation strategy. A multicenter crosssectional survey was carried out among physicians, residents, nurses and clinical obstetricians of thirteen Dutch hospitals. Survey development was prepared through a literature search and stakeholder interviews. Data collection and analysis were based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A total of 465 stakeholders completed the survey. The main barriers concerned the expectance of the department’s capacity problems and the issues with maternal information transfer between departments. Facilitators concerned multiple relative advantages of the EOS calculator, including stakeholder education, EOS calculator integration in the electronic health record and existing positive expectations about the safety and effectivity of the calculator. Based on these findings, tailored implementation interventions can be developed, such as identifying early adopters and champions, conducting educational meetings tailored to the target group, creating ready-to-use educational materials, integrating the EOS calculator into electronic health records, creating a culture of collective responsibility among departments and collecting data to evaluate implementation success and innovation results. Show less
Willcox, M.L.; Okello, I.A.; Maidwell-Smith, A.; Tura, A.K.; Akker, T. van den; Knight, M.; ... ; Muller, I. 2023
BackgroundMaternal and Perinatal Death Surveillance and Review (MPDSR) can reduce mortality but its implementation is often suboptimal, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)... Show moreBackgroundMaternal and Perinatal Death Surveillance and Review (MPDSR) can reduce mortality but its implementation is often suboptimal, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).ObjectivesTo understand the determinants of behaviors influencing implementation of MPDSR in LMICs (through a systematic review of qualitative studies), in order to plan an intervention to improve its implementation.Search StrategyTerms for maternal or perinatal death reviews and qualitative studies.Selection CriteriaQualitative studies regarding implementation of MPDSR in LMICs.Data Collection and AnalysisWe coded the included studies using the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B model of behavior change (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation). We developed guiding principles for interventions to improve implementation of MPDSR.Main ResultsFifty-nine studies met our inclusion criteria. Capabilities required to conduct MPDSR (knowledge and technical/leadership skills) increase cumulatively from community to health facility and leadership levels. Physical and social opportunities depend on adequate data, human and financial resources, and a blame-free environment. All stakeholders were motivated to avoid negative consequences (blame, litigation, disciplinary action).ConclusionsImplementation of MPDSR could be improved by (1) introducing structural changes to reduce negative consequences, (2) strengthening data collection tools and information systems, (3) mobilizing adequate resources, and (4) building capabilities of all stakeholders.Implementation of MPDSR could be improved by introducing changes to reduce negative consequences, strengthening data collection tools, mobilizing resources, and building capabilities of all stakeholders. Show less
While eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth... Show moreWhile eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth effectively in geriatric rehabilitation, it is essential to understand the experiences and needs of healthcare professionals. In this international multicentre cross-sectional study, we used a web-based survey to explore the use, benefits, feasibility and usability of eHealth in geriatric rehabilitation settings, together with the needs of working healthcare professionals. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative findings. The survey was completed by 513 healthcare professionals from 16 countries. Over half had experience with eHealth, although very few (52 of 263 = 20%) integrated eHealth into daily practice. Important barriers to the use or implementation of eHealth included insufficient resources, lack of an organization-wide implementation strategy and lack of knowledge. Professionals felt that eHealth is more complex for patients than for themselves, and also expressed a need for reliable information concerning available eHealth interventions and their applications. While eHealth has clear benefits, important barriers hinder successful implementation and integration into healthcare. Tailored implementation strategies and reliable information on effective eHealth applications are needed to overcome these barriers. Show less
While eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth... Show moreWhile eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth effectively in geriatric rehabilitation, it is essential to understand the experiences and needs of healthcare professionals. In this international multicentre cross-sectional study, we used a web-based survey to explore the use, benefits, feasibility and usability of eHealth in geriatric rehabilitation settings, together with the needs of working healthcare professionals. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative findings. The survey was completed by 513 healthcare professionals from 16 countries. Over half had experience with eHealth, although very few (52 of 263 = 20%) integrated eHealth into daily practice. Important barriers to the use or implementation of eHealth included insufficient resources, lack of an organization-wide implementation strategy and lack of knowledge. Professionals felt that eHealth is more complex for patients than for themselves, and also expressed a need for reliable information concerning available eHealth interventions and their applications. While eHealth has clear benefits, important barriers hinder successful implementation and integration into healthcare. Tailored implementation strategies and reliable information on effective eHealth applications are needed to overcome these barriers. Show less
While eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth... Show moreWhile eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth effectively in geriatric rehabilitation, it is essential to understand the experiences and needs of healthcare professionals. In this international multicentre cross-sectional study, we used a web-based survey to explore the use, benefits, feasibility and usability of eHealth in geriatric rehabilitation settings, together with the needs of working healthcare professionals. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative findings. The survey was completed by 513 healthcare professionals from 16 countries. Over half had experience with eHealth, although very few (52 of 263 = 20%) integrated eHealth into daily practice. Important barriers to the use or implementation of eHealth included insufficient resources, lack of an organization-wide implementation strategy and lack of knowledge. Professionals felt that eHealth is more complex for patients than for themselves, and also expressed a need for reliable information concerning available eHealth interventions and their applications. While eHealth has clear benefits, important barriers hinder successful implementation and integration into healthcare. Tailored implementation strategies and reliable information on effective eHealth applications are needed to overcome these barriers. Show less
While eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth... Show moreWhile eHealth can help improve outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, the implementation and integration of eHealth is often complex and time-consuming. To use eHealth effectively in geriatric rehabilitation, it is essential to understand the experiences and needs of healthcare professionals. In this international multicentre cross-sectional study, we used a web-based survey to explore the use, benefits, feasibility and usability of eHealth in geriatric rehabilitation settings, together with the needs of working healthcare professionals. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative findings. The survey was completed by 513 healthcare professionals from 16 countries. Over half had experience with eHealth, although very few (52 of 263 = 20%) integrated eHealth into daily practice. Important barriers to the use or implementation of eHealth included insufficient resources, lack of an organization-wide implementation strategy and lack of knowledge. Professionals felt that eHealth is more complex for patients than for themselves, and also expressed a need for reliable information concerning available eHealth interventions and their applications. While eHealth has clear benefits, important barriers hinder successful implementation and integration into healthcare. Tailored implementation strategies and reliable information on effective eHealth applications are needed to overcome these barriers. Show less
Objective:To determine the nationwide implementation and surgical outcome of minor and major robotic liver surgery (RLS) and assess the first phase of implementation of RLS during the learning... Show moreObjective:To determine the nationwide implementation and surgical outcome of minor and major robotic liver surgery (RLS) and assess the first phase of implementation of RLS during the learning curve. Background:RLS may be a valuable alternative to laparoscopic liver surgery. Nationwide population-based studies with data on implementation and outcome of RLS are lacking. Methods:Multicenter retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients who underwent RLS for all indications in 9 Dutch centers (August 2014-March 2021). Data on all liver resections were obtained from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit (DHBA) including data from all 27 centers for liver surgery in the Netherlands. Outcomes were stratified for minor, technically major, and anatomically major RLS. Learning curve effect was assessed using cumulative sum analysis for blood loss. Results:Of 9437 liver resections, 400 were RLS (4.2%) procedures including 207 minor (52.2%), 141 technically major (35.3%), and 52 anatomically major (13%). The nationwide use of RLS increased from 0.2% in 2014 to 11.9% in 2020. The proportion of RLS among all minimally invasive liver resections increased from 2% to 28%. Median blood loss was 150 mL (interquartile range 50-350 mL] and the conversion rate 6.3% (n=25). The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade >= III complications was 7.0% (n=27), median length of hospital stay 4 days (interquartile range 2-5) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 0.8% (n=3). The R0 resection rate was 83.2% (n=263). Cumulative sum analysis for blood loss found a learning curve of at least 33 major RLS procedures. Conclusions:The nationwide use of RLS in the Netherlands has increased rapidly with currently one-tenth of all liver resections and one-fourth of all minimally invasive liver resections being performed robotically. Although surgical outcomes of RLS in selected patient seem favorable, future prospective studies should determine its added value. Show less
Brouns, B.; Meesters, J.J.L.; Kloet, A.J. de; Vlieland, T.P.M.V.; Houdijk, S.; Arwert, H.J.; Bodegom-Vos, L. van 2022
Background Implementation of an eRehabilitation intervention named Fit After Stroke @Home (Fast@home) - including cognitive/physical exercise applications, activity-tracking, psycho-education -... Show moreBackground Implementation of an eRehabilitation intervention named Fit After Stroke @Home (Fast@home) - including cognitive/physical exercise applications, activity-tracking, psycho-education - after stroke resulted in health-related improvements. This study investigated what worked and why in the implementation. Methods Implementation activities (information provision, integration of Fast@home, instruction and motivation) were performed for 14 months and evaluated, using the Medical Research Council framework for process evaluations which consists of three evaluation domains (implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors). Implementation activities were evaluated by field notes/surveys/user data, it's mechanisms of impact by surveys and contextual factors by field notes/interviews among 11 professionals. Surveys were conducted among 51 professionals and 73 patients. User data (n = 165 patients) were extracted from the eRehabilitation applications. Results Implementation activities were executed as planned. Of the professionals trained to deliver the intervention (33 of 51), 25 (75.8%) delivered it. Of the 165 patients, 82 (49.7%) were registered for Fast@home, with 54 patient (65.8%) using it. Mechanisms of impact showed that professionals and patients were equally satisfied with implementation activities (median score 7.0 [IQR 6.0-7.75] versus 7.0 [6.0-7.5]), but patients were more satisfied with the intervention (8.0 [IQR 7.0-8.0] versus 5.5 [4.0-7.0]). Guidance by professionals was seen as most impactful for implementation by patients and support of clinical champions and time given for training by professionals. Professionals rated the integration of Fast@home as insufficient. Contextual factors (financial cutbacks and technical setbacks) hampered the implementation. Conclusion Main improvements of the implementation of eRehabilitation are related to professionals' perceptions of the intervention, integration of eRehabilitation and contextual factors.Implication for rehabilitation To increase the use of eRehabilitation by patients, patients should be supported by their healthcare professional in their first time use and during the rehabilitation process. To increase the use of eRehabilitation by healthcare professionals, healthcare professionals should be (1) supported by a clinical champion and (2) provided with sufficient time for learning to work and getting familiar with the eRehabilitation program. Integration of eRehabilitation in conventional stroke rehabilitation (optimal blended care) is an important challenge and a prerequisite for the implementation of eRehabilitation in the clinical setting. Show less
Verstraeten, H.M.F.; Ziylan, C.; Gerritsen, D.L.; Huijsman, R.; Nakanishi, M.; Smalbrugge, M.; ... ; Bakker, T.J.E.M. 2022
Background:Neuropsychiatric symptoms occur frequently in many nursing home residents with dementia. Despite the availability of multidisciplinary guidelines, neuropsychiatric symptoms are often... Show moreBackground:Neuropsychiatric symptoms occur frequently in many nursing home residents with dementia. Despite the availability of multidisciplinary guidelines, neuropsychiatric symptoms are often inadequately managed. Three proven effective methods for managing neuropsychiatric symptoms were integrated into a single intervention method: the STIP-Method, a personalized integrated stepped-care method to prevent and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms. The STIP-Method comprises 5 phases of clinical reasoning to neuropsychiatric symptoms and 4 stepped-care interventions and is supported with a web application.Objective:This study aims to identify the facilitators and barriers in the implementation of the STIP-Method in nursing homes.Methods:A mixed methods design within a participatory action research was used to implement the STIP-Method in 4 facilities of 2 Dutch nursing home organizations. In total, we aimed at participation of 160-200 persons with dementia and expected an intervention fidelity of 50% or more, based on earlier studies regarding implementation of effective psychosocial interventions to manage neuropsychiatric symptoms. All involved managers and professionals were trained in the principles of the STIP-Method and in using the web application. An advisory board of professionals, managers, and informal caregivers in each facility supported the implementation during 21 months, including an intermission of 6 months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In these 6-weekly advisory board meetings, 2 researchers stimulated the members to reflect on progress of the implementation by making use of available data from patient records and the web application. Additionally, the 2 researchers invited the members to suggest how to improve the implementation. Data analysis will involve (1) analysis of facilitators and barriers to the implementation derived from verbatim text reports of advisory board meetings to better understand the implementation process; (2) analysis of patient records in accordance with multidisciplinary guidelines to neuropsychiatric symptoms: personalized, interdisciplinary, and proactive management of neuropsychiatric symptoms; (3) evaluation of the web application in terms of usability scores; (4) pre- and postimplementation analysis of patient records and the web application to evaluate the impact of the STIP-Method, such as changes in neuropsychiatric symptoms and informal caregiver burden.Results:We enrolled 328 persons with dementia. Data collection started in July 2019 and ended in December 2021. The first version of this manuscript was submitted in October 2021. The first results of data analysis are expected to be published in December 2022 and final results in June 2023.Conclusions:Our study may increase understanding of facilitators and barriers to the prevention and treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in nursing home residents with dementia by implementing the integrated STIP-Method. The need for well-designed implementation studies is of importance to provide nursing homes with optimal tools to prevent and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms. Show less
Verstraeten, H.M.F.; Ziylan, C.; Gerritsen, D.L.; Huijsman, R.; Nakanishi, M.; Smalbrugge, M.; ... ; Bakker, T.J.E.M. 2022
Background:Neuropsychiatric symptoms occur frequently in many nursing home residents with dementia. Despite the availability of multidisciplinary guidelines, neuropsychiatric symptoms are often... Show moreBackground:Neuropsychiatric symptoms occur frequently in many nursing home residents with dementia. Despite the availability of multidisciplinary guidelines, neuropsychiatric symptoms are often inadequately managed. Three proven effective methods for managing neuropsychiatric symptoms were integrated into a single intervention method: the STIP-Method, a personalized integrated stepped-care method to prevent and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms. The STIP-Method comprises 5 phases of clinical reasoning to neuropsychiatric symptoms and 4 stepped-care interventions and is supported with a web application.Objective:This study aims to identify the facilitators and barriers in the implementation of the STIP-Method in nursing homes.Methods:A mixed methods design within a participatory action research was used to implement the STIP-Method in 4 facilities of 2 Dutch nursing home organizations. In total, we aimed at participation of 160-200 persons with dementia and expected an intervention fidelity of 50% or more, based on earlier studies regarding implementation of effective psychosocial interventions to manage neuropsychiatric symptoms. All involved managers and professionals were trained in the principles of the STIP-Method and in using the web application. An advisory board of professionals, managers, and informal caregivers in each facility supported the implementation during 21 months, including an intermission of 6 months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In these 6-weekly advisory board meetings, 2 researchers stimulated the members to reflect on progress of the implementation by making use of available data from patient records and the web application. Additionally, the 2 researchers invited the members to suggest how to improve the implementation. Data analysis will involve (1) analysis of facilitators and barriers to the implementation derived from verbatim text reports of advisory board meetings to better understand the implementation process; (2) analysis of patient records in accordance with multidisciplinary guidelines to neuropsychiatric symptoms: personalized, interdisciplinary, and proactive management of neuropsychiatric symptoms; (3) evaluation of the web application in terms of usability scores; (4) pre- and postimplementation analysis of patient records and the web application to evaluate the impact of the STIP-Method, such as changes in neuropsychiatric symptoms and informal caregiver burden.Results:We enrolled 328 persons with dementia. Data collection started in July 2019 and ended in December 2021. The first version of this manuscript was submitted in October 2021. The first results of data analysis are expected to be published in December 2022 and final results in June 2023.Conclusions:Our study may increase understanding of facilitators and barriers to the prevention and treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in nursing home residents with dementia by implementing the integrated STIP-Method. The need for well-designed implementation studies is of importance to provide nursing homes with optimal tools to prevent and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms. Show less
Rodrigues, T.R.C.; Buisonje, D.R. de; Keesman, M.; Reijnders, T.; Geer, J.E. van der; Janssen, V.R.; ... ; Evers, A.W.M. 2021
Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) pose a significant health threat and reduce both people's life expectancy and quality of life. Healthy living is a key component in the effective... Show moreBackground: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) pose a significant health threat and reduce both people's life expectancy and quality of life. Healthy living is a key component in the effective prevention and treatment of CVD. However, health care professionals (HCPs) experience difficulties in supporting lifestyle changes among their patients. eHealth can provide a solution to these barriers.Objective: This study aims to provide insights into the factors HCPs find important in the support of patients with CVD in the uptake of and adherence to a healthy lifestyle and the perceived facilitators of and barriers to using eHealth to provide lifestyle support to patients with CVD.Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 16 Dutch HCPs specializing in lifestyle support in cardiac care.Results: We identified 13 themes, of which the first 12 concerned lifestyle support in general and were related to intervention, patient, or health care. Throughout these themes, the use of eHealth reoccurred as a potential facilitator of or solution to barriers to lifestyle support. Our final theme specifically concerned barriers to the adoption and usability of eHealth.Conclusions: HCPs do recognize the potential advantages of eHealth while experiencing barriers to using digital tools. Incorporating their needs and values in the development of lifestyle support programs, especially eHealth, could increase their use and lead to a more widespread adoption of eHealth into health care. Show less
The recognition and treatment of pain in nursing home residents presents challenges best addressed by a multidisciplinary approach. This approach is also recommended in the applicable Dutch... Show moreThe recognition and treatment of pain in nursing home residents presents challenges best addressed by a multidisciplinary approach. This approach is also recommended in the applicable Dutch guideline; however, translating guidelines into practical strategies is often difficult in nursing homes. Nevertheless, a better understanding of guideline implementation is key to improving the quality of care. Here we describe and qualitatively evaluate the implementation process of the multidisciplinary guideline 'Recognition and treatment of chronic pain in vulnerable elderly' in a Dutch nursing home. The researchers used interviews and document analyses to study the nursing home's implementation of the guideline. The project team of the nursing home first filled out an implementation matrix to formulate goals based on preferred knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors for the defined target groups. Together with experts and organizations, pharmacotherapy audit meetings were organized, an expert pain team was appointed, a policy document and policy flowchart were prepared, and 'anchor personnel' were assigned to disseminate knowledge amongst professionals. Implementation was partially successful and resulted in a functioning pain team, a pain policy, the selection of preferred measurement instruments, and pain becoming a fixed topic during multidisciplinary meetings. Nevertheless, relatively few professionals were aware of the implementation process. Show less
Bank, P.C.D.; Jacobs, L.H.J.; Berg, S.A.A. van den; Deutekom, H.W.M. van; Hamann, D.; Molenkamp, R.; ... ; Oosterhuis, W.P. 2021
The in vitro diagnostic medical devices regulation (IVDR) will take effect in May 2022. This regulation has a large impact on both the manufacturers of in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD) and... Show moreThe in vitro diagnostic medical devices regulation (IVDR) will take effect in May 2022. This regulation has a large impact on both the manufacturers of in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD) and clinical laboratories. For clinical laboratories, the IVDR poses restrictions on the use of laboratory developed tests (LDTs). To provide a uniform interpretation of the IVDR for colleagues in clinical practice, the IVDR Task Force was created by the scientific societies of laboratory specialties in the Netherlands. A guidance document with explanations and interpretations of relevant passages of the IVDR was drafted to help laboratories prepare for the impact of this new legislation. Feedback from interested parties and stakeholders was collected and used to further improve the document. Here we would like to present our approach to our European colleagues and inform them about the impact of the IVDR and, importantlywewould like to present potentially useful approaches to fulfill the requirements of the IVDR for LDTs. Show less
Background: The impact of precision psychiatry for clinical practice has not been systematically appraised. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of validated prediction models to... Show moreBackground: The impact of precision psychiatry for clinical practice has not been systematically appraised. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of validated prediction models to estimate the individual risk of being affected with a condition (diagnostic), developing outcomes (prognostic), or responding to treatments (predictive) in mental disorders. Methods: PRISMA/RIGHT/ CHARMS-compliant systematic review of the Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Reviews, and Ovid/PsycINFO databases from inception until July 21, 2019 (PROSPERO CRD42019155713) to identify diagnostic/prognostic/predictive prediction studies that reported individualized estimates in psychiatry and that were internally or externally validated or implemented. Random effect meta-regression analyses addressed the impact of several factors on the accuracy of prediction models. Findings: Literature search identified 584 prediction modeling studies, of which 89 were included. 10.4% of the total studies included prediction models internally validated (n = 61), 4.6% models externally validated (n = 27), and 0.2% (n = 1) models considered for implementation. Across validated prediction modeling studies (n = 88), 18.2% were diagnostic, 68.2% prognostic, and 13.6% predictive. The most frequently investigated condition was psychosis (36.4%), and the most frequently employed predictors clinical (69.5%). Unimodal compared to multimodal models (beta = .29, P = .03) and diagnostic compared to prognostic (beta = .84, p < .0001) and predictive (beta = .87, P = .002) models were associated with increased accuracy. Interpretation: To date, several validated prediction models arc available to support the diagnosis and prognosis of psychiatric conditions, in particular, psychosis, or to predict treatment response. Advancements of knowledge are limited by the lack of implementation research in real-world clinical practice. A new generation of implementation research is required to address this translational gap. Show less
Versluis, A.; Luenen, S. van; Meijer, E.; Honkoop, P.J.; Pinnock, H.; Mohr, D.C.; ... ; Kleij, R.M.J.J. van der 2020
Background The implementation of eHealth applications in primary care remains challenging. Enhancing knowledge and awareness of implementation determinants is critical to build evidence-based... Show moreBackground The implementation of eHealth applications in primary care remains challenging. Enhancing knowledge and awareness of implementation determinants is critical to build evidence-based implementation strategies and optimise uptake and sustainability. Objectives We consider how evidence-based implementation strategies can be built to support eHealth implementation. Discussion What implementation strategies to consider depends on (potential) barriers and facilitators to eHealth implementation in a given situation. Therefore, we first discuss key barriers and facilitators following the five domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Cost is identified as a critical barrier to eHealth implementation. Privacy, security problems, and a lack of recognised standards for eHealth applications also hinder implementation. Engagement of key stakeholders in the implementation process, planning the implementation of the intervention, and the availability of training and support are important facilitators. To support care professionals and researchers, we provide a stepwise approach to develop and apply evidence-based implementation strategies for eHealth in primary care. It includes the following steps: (1) specify the eHealth application, (2) define problem, (3) specify desired implementation behaviour, and (4) choose and (5) evaluate the implementation strategy. To improve the fit of the implementation strategy with the setting, the stepwise approach considers the phase of the implementation process and the specific context. Conclusion Applying an approach, as provided here, may help to improve the implementation of eHealth applications in primary care. Show less
Despite the evolving evidence in favor of shared decision making (SDM) and of decades-long calls for its adoption, SDM remains uncommon in routine care. Reflecting on this lack of progress, we... Show moreDespite the evolving evidence in favor of shared decision making (SDM) and of decades-long calls for its adoption, SDM remains uncommon in routine care. Reflecting on this lack of progress, we sought to reimagine the future of SDM and the path to take us there. In late 2017, a multidisciplinary and international group of six researchers were challenged by a senior SDM scholar to envision the future and, based on a provocatively critical view of the present, to write letters to themselves from the year 2028. Letters were exchanged and discussed electronically. The group then met in person to discuss the letters. Since the letters painted a dystopian picture, they triggered questions about the nature of SDM, who should benefit from SDM, how to measure its contribution to care, and what new ways can be invented to design and test interventions to implement SDM in routine care. Through contrasting the purposefully generated dystopias with an ideal future for SDM, we generated reflections on a research agenda for SDM. These reflections hinged on recognizing SDM's contributing to care, that is, as a way to advance the problematic human situation of patients. These focused on three distinct yet complimentary contributors to SDM: 1) the process of making decisions, 2) humanistic communication, and 3) fit-to-care of the resulting decision. The group then concluded that to move SDM from envisioned to routine practice, and to ensure it reaches all, particularly persons rendered vulnerable by current forms of health care, a substantial investment in implementation research is necessary. Perhaps the discussion of these reflections can contribute to a path forward that will improve the likelihood of the future we dream for SDM. Show less
Wouden, C.H. van der; Paasman, E.; Teichert, M.; Crone, M.R.; Guchelaar, H.J.; Swen, J.J. 2020
Despite overcoming many implementation barriers, pharmacogenomic (PGx) panel-testing is not routine practice in the Netherlands. Therefore, we aim to study pharmacists' perceived enablers and... Show moreDespite overcoming many implementation barriers, pharmacogenomic (PGx) panel-testing is not routine practice in the Netherlands. Therefore, we aim to study pharmacists' perceived enablers and barriers for PGx panel-testing among pharmacists participating in a PGx implementation study. Here, pharmacists identify primary care patients, initiating one of 39 drugs with a Dutch Pharmacogenetic Working Group (DPWG) recommendation and subsequently utilizing the results of a 12 gene PGx panel test to guide dose and drug selection. Pharmacists were invited for a general survey and a semi-structured interview based on the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework, aiming to identify implementation enablers and barriers, if they had managed at least two patients with actionable PGx results. In total, 15 semi-structured interviews were performed before saturation point was reached. Of these, five barrier themes emerged: (1) unclear procedures, (2) undetermined reimbursement for PGx test and consult, (3) insufficient evidence of clinical utility for PGx panel-testing, (4) infrastructure inefficiencies, and (5) HCP PGx knowledge and awareness; and two enabler themes: (1) pharmacist perceived role in delivering PGx, and (2) believed clinical utility of PGx. Despite a strong belief in the beneficial effects of PGx, pharmacists' barriers remain, an these hinder implementation in primary care. Show less
