Search

Background Malnutrition in elderly institutionalized patients is a significant challenge associated with adverse health outcomes. The ‘MyFood’ decision support system was designed to prevent and treat malnutrition and has previously been studied in a hospital setting. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of nursing staff regarding the implementation of MyFood in settings treating elderly patients. Methods The study was conducted in two settings treating elderly patients in Norway. Nursing staff received training in how to follow-up patients with MyFood. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 12 nursing staff. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide the data collection and the thematic data analysis. Results The implementation of a digital decision support system to prevent and treat malnutrition into settings treating elderly patients was found to be affected by intervention-related, contextual, and personal factors. Although nursing staff experienced several advantages, the leadership engagement was low and hampered the implementation. Conclusion Nursing staff experienced several advantages with implementing a digital decision support system for the prevention and treatment of malnutrition in institutionalized elderly patients, including quality improvements and time savings. The results indicate that the leadership engagement was weak and that some nursing staff experienced low self-efficacy in digital competence. Future improvements include increasing the level of training, using MyFood throughout the patient course and involving the patient’s next-of-kin. Trial registration The study was acknowledged by The Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD), ref. number 135175.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women in early labour have felt excluded from professional care, and their partners have been restricted from being involved in the birthing process. Expectant parents must be better prepared to deal with fear and stress during early labour. There is a need for evidence-based information and digital applications that can empower couples during childbirth. OBJECTIVE: To develop and identify requirements for a practice-based mobile health (mHealth) application for Digital Early Labour Support. METHODS: This research started with creating an expert group composed of a multidisciplinary team capable of informing the app development process on evidence-based practices. In consultation with the expert group, the app was built using an agile development approach (i.e., Scrum) within a continuous software engineering setting (i.e., CI/CD, DevOps), also including user and security tests. RESULTS: During the development of the Early Labour App, two main types of challenges emerged: (1) user challenges, related to understanding the users' needs and experience with the app, and (2) team challenges, related to the software development team in particular, and the necessary skills for translating an early labour intervention into a digital solution. This study reaffirms the importance of midwife support via blended care and the opportunity of complementing it with an app. The Early Labour App was easy to use, the women needed little to no help, and the partner's preparation was facilitated. The combination of the app together with blended care opens up awareness, thoughts and feelings about the method and provides good preparation for the birth. CONCLUSION: We propose the creation of the Early Labour App, a mHealth app for early labour support. The preliminary tests conducted for the Early Labour App show that the app is mature, allowing it to be used in the project's Randomised Control Trial, which is already ongoing.

Background Patient engagement is recommended for improving health care services, and to evaluate its organisation and impact appropriate, and rigorously evaluated outcome measures are needed. Methods Interviews (N = 12) were conducted to assess relevance of the Canadian Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PPEET) in a Norwegian setting were performed. The tool was translated, back translated, and assessed following cognitive interviews (N = 13), according to the COSMIN checklist. Data quality was assessed in a cross-sectional survey of patient advisory board members from different rehabilitation institutions (N = 47). Results Interviews with patient board representatives confirmed the relevance of the PPEET Organisational questionnaire in a Norwegian setting and contributed five additional items. Translation and back translation of the original PPEET showed no major content differences. Differences in vocabulary and sentence structure were solved by discussion among the translators. Comments from cognitive interviews mainly related to the use of different synonyms, layout, and minor differences in semantic structure. Results of the cross-sectional survey support the data quality and construct validity of PPEET items, including 95 score comparisons where 76 (80%) were as hypothesized. Conclusions The PPEET Organisational questionnaire has been thoroughly translated and tested, and the resulting Evalueringsverktøy for Brukermedvirkning (EBNOR) has adequate levels of comprehensibility and content validity. Further testing for measurement properties is recommended, but given these results, the EBNOR should be considered for assessing patient engagement in a Norwegian health care organisational context.

Additional file 1. Semi-structured interview guide for interviews with health care providers

Additional file 2: Supplementary file 2. Interview guide patients.

Additional file 1: Supplementary file 1. Interview guide nurses.

Additional file 1. InvolveMe Interview guide

Background: Although there is growing evidence of the positive effects of Internet-based patient-provider communication (IPPC) services for both patients and health care providers, their implementation into clinical practice continues to be a challenge. Objective: The 3 aims of this study were to (1) identify and compare barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of an IPPC service in 5 hospital units using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), (2) assess the ability of the different constructs of CFIR to distinguish between high and low implementation success, and (3) compare our findings with those from other studies that used the CFIR to discriminate between high and low implementation success. Methods: This study was based on individual interviews with 10 nurses, 6 physicians, and 1 nutritionist who had used the IPPC to answer messages from patients. Results: Of the 36 CFIR constructs, 28 were addressed in the interviews, of which 12 distinguished between high and low implementation units. Most of the distinguishing constructs were related to the inner setting domain of CFIR, indicating that institutional factors were particularly important for successful implementation. Health care providers’ beliefs in the intervention as useful for themselves and their patients as well as the implementation process itself were also important. A comparison of constructs across ours and 2 other studies that also used the CFIR to discriminate between high and low implementation success showed that 24 CFIR constructs distinguished between high and low implementation units in at least 1 study; 11 constructs distinguished in 2 studies. However, only 2 constructs (patient need and resources and available resources) distinguished consistently between high and low implementation units in all 3 studies. Conclusions: The CFIR is a helpful framework for illuminating barriers and facilitators influencing IPPC implementation. However, CFIR’s strength of being broad and comprehensive also limits its usefulness as an implementation framework because it does not discriminate between the relative importance of its many constructs for implementation success. This is the first study to identify which CFIR constructs are the most promising to distinguish between high and low implementation success across settings and interventions. Findings from this study can contribute to the refinement of CFIR toward a more succinct and parsimonious framework for planning and evaluation of the implementation of clinical interventions. ClinicalTrial: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00971139; http://clinicaltrial.gov/ct2/show/NCT00971139 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6cWeqN1uY) [J Med Internet Res 2015;17(11):e262]