Search

Background: National guidelines recommend that maternity systems provide patient-centered access to immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (ie, insertion of an intrauterine device or implant during the delivery hospitalization). Hospitals face significant barriers to offering these services, and efforts to improve peripartum contraception care quality have met with mixed success. Implementation toolkits-packages of resources and strategies to facilitate the implementation of new services-are a promising approach for guiding clinical practice change.Objective: This study aimed to develop a theory-informed toolkit, evaluate the feasibility of toolkit-based implementation of immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception care in a single site, and refine the toolkit and implementation process for future effectiveness testing.Study Design: We conducted a single-site feasibility study of the toolkit-based implementation of immediate postpartum contraception services at a large academic medical center in 2017 to 2020. Based on previous qualitative work, we developed a theory-informed implementation toolkit. A stakeholder panel selected toolkit resources to use in a multicomponent implementation intervention at the study site. These resources included tools and strategies designed to optimize implementation conditions (ie, implementation leadership, planning, and evaluation; the financial environment; engagement of key stakeholders; patient needs; compatibility with workflow; and clinician and staff knowledge, skills, and attitudes). The implementation intervention was executed from January 2018 to April 2019. Study outcomes included implementation outcomes (ie, provider perceptions of the implementation process and implementation tools [assessed via online provider survey]) and healthcare quality outcomes (ie, trends in prenatal contraceptive counseling, trends in immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive utilization [both ascertained by institutional administrative data], and the patient experience of contraceptive care [assessed via serial, cross-sectional, online patient survey items adapted from the National Quality Forum-endorsed, validated Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling measure]).Results: In the implementation process, among 172 of 401 eligible clinicians (43%) participating in surveys, 70% were "extremely" or "somewhat" satisfied with the implementation process overall. In the prenatal contraceptive counseling, among 4960 individuals undergoing childbirth at the study site in 2019, 1789 (36.1%) had documented prenatal counseling about postpartum contraception. Documented counseling rates increased overall throughout 2019 (Q1, 12.5%; Q4, 51.0%) but varied significantly by clinic site (Q4, range 30%-79%). Immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception utilization increased throughout the study period (before implementation, 5.46% of deliveries; during implementation, 8.95%; after implementation, 8.58%). In the patient experience of contraceptive care, patient survey respondents (response rate, 15%-29%) were largely White (344/425 [81%]) and highly educated (309/425 [73%] with at least a 4-year college degree), reflecting the study site population. Scores were poor across settings, with modest improvements in the hospital setting from 2018 to 2020 (prenatal visits, 67%-63%; hospitalization, 45%-58%; outpatient after delivery, 69%-65%). Based on these findings, toolkit refinements included additional resources designed to routinize prenatal contraceptive counseling and support a more patient-centered experience of contraceptive care.Conclusion: A toolkit-based process to implement immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive services at a single academic center was associated with high acceptability but mixed healthcare quality outcomes. Toolkit resources were added to optimize counseling rates and the patient experience of contraceptive care. Future research should formally test the effectiveness of the refined toolkit in a multisite, prospective trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The implementation of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) as an intervention to foster clinical practice change is affected by many factors. Key factors include those associated with behavioral change and those associated with technology acceptance. However, the literature regarding these subjects is fragmented and originates from two traditionally separate disciplines: implementation science and technology acceptance.Objective: Our objective is to propose an integrated framework that bridges the gap between the behavioral change and technology acceptance aspects of the implementation of CDSSs.Methods: We employed an iterative process to map constructs from four contributing frameworks-the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF); the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); the Human, Organization, and Technology-fit framework (HOT-fit); and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)-and the findings of 10 literature reviews, identified through a systematic review of reviews approach.Results: The resulting framework comprises 22 domains: agreement with the decision algorithm; attitudes; behavioral regulation; beliefs about capabilities; beliefs about consequences; contingencies; demographic characteristics; effort expectancy; emotions; environmental context and resources; goals; intentions; intervention characteristics; knowledge; memory, attention, and decision processes; patient-health professional relationship; patient's preferences; performance expectancy; role and identity; skills, ability, and competence; social influences; and system quality. We demonstrate the use of the framework providing examples from two research projects.Conclusions: We proposed BEAR (BEhavior and Acceptance fRamework), an integrated framework that bridges the gap between behavioral change and technology acceptance, thereby widening the view established by current models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The distribution of printed materials is the most frequently used strategy to disseminate and implement clinical practice guidelines, although several studies have shown that the effectiveness of this approach is modest at best. Nevertheless, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of other strategies. Recent research has shown that the use of computerized decision support presents a promising approach to address some aspects of this problem. Objective: The aim of this study is to provide qualitative evidence on the potential effect of mobile decision support systems to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based recommendations included in clinical practice guidelines. Methods: We will conduct a qualitative study with two arms to compare the experience of primary care physicians while they try to implement an evidence-based recommendation in their clinical practice. In the first arm, we will provide participants with a printout of the guideline article containing the recommendation, while in the second arm, we will provide participants with a mobile app developed after formalizing the recommendation text into a clinical algorithm. Data will be collected using semistructured and open interviews to explore aspects of behavioral change and technology acceptance involved in the implementation process. The analysis will be comprised of two phases. During the first phase, we will conduct a template analysis to identify barriers and facilitators in each scenario. Then, during the second phase, we will contrast the findings from each arm to propose hypotheses about the potential impact of the system. Results: We have formalized the narrative in the recommendation into a clinical algorithm and have developed a mobile app. Data collection is expected to occur during 2018, with the first phase of analysis running in parallel. The second phase is scheduled to conclude in July 2019. Conclusions: Our study will further the understanding of the role of mobile decision support systems in the implementation of clinical practice guidelines. Furthermore, we will provide qualitative evidence to aid decisions made by low- and middle-income countries' ministries of health about investments in these technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]