Search

Abstract Background Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of chronic pain and disability worldwide. Self-management is vital with education, exercise and weight loss core recommended treatments. However, evidence-practice gaps exist, and service models that increase patient accessibility to clinicians who can support lifestyle management are needed. The primary aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of a telehealth-delivered clinician-supported exercise and weight loss program (Better Hip) on the primary outcomes of hip pain on walking and physical function at 6 months, compared with an information-only control for people with hip OA. Methods A two-arm, parallel-design, superiority pragmatic randomised controlled trial. 212 members from a health insurance fund aged 45 years and over, with painful hip OA will be recruited. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive: i) Better Hip; or ii) web-based information only (control). Participants randomised to the Better Hip program will have six videoconferencing physiotherapist consultations for education about OA, prescription of individualised home-based strengthening and physical activity programs, behaviour change support, and facilitation of other self-management strategies. Those with a body mass index > 27 kg/m2, aged

Abstract Background Disentangling the interplay between experience-based intuition and theory-informed implementation is crucial for identifying the direct contribution theory can make for generating behaviour changes needed for successful evidence translation. In the context of ‘clinicogenomics’, a complex and rapidly evolving field demanding swift practice change, we aimed to (a) describe a combined clinician intuition- and theory-driven method for identifying determinants of and strategies for implementing clinicogenomics, and (b) articulate a structured approach to standardise hypothesised behavioural pathways and make potential underlying theory explicit. Methods Interview data from 16 non-genetic medical specialists using genomics in practice identified three target behaviour areas across the testing process: (1) identifying patients, (2) test ordering and reporting, (3) communicating results. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to group barriers and facilitators to performing these actions. Barriers were grouped by distinct TDF domains, with ‘overarching’ TDF themes identified for overlapping barriers. Clinician intuitively-derived implementation strategies were matched with corresponding barriers, and retrospectively coded against behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Where no intuitive strategies were provided, theory-driven strategies were generated. An algorithm was developed and applied to articulate how implementation strategies address barriers to influence behaviour change. Results Across all target behaviour areas, 32 identified barriers were coded across seven distinct TDF domains and eight overarching TDF themes. Within the 29 intuitive strategies, 21 BCTs were represented and used on 49 occasions to address 23 barriers. On 10 (20%) of these occasions, existing empirical links were found between BCTs and corresponding distinct TDF-coded barriers. Twenty additional theory-driven implementation strategies (using 19 BCTs on 31 occasions) were developed to address nine remaining barriers. Conclusion Clinicians naturally generate their own solutions when implementing clinical interventions, and in this clinicogenomics example these intuitive strategies aligned with theoretical recommendations 20% of the time. We have matched intuitive strategies with theory-driven BCTs to make potential underlying theory explicit through proposed structured hypothesised causal pathways. Transparency and efficiency are enhanced, providing a novel method to identify determinants of implementation. Operationalising this approach to support the design of implementation strategies may optimise practice change in response to rapidly evolving scientific advances requiring swift translation into healthcare.

Abstract Background Older people living in residential aged care facilities are at high risk of acquiring infections such as influenza, gastroenteritis, and more recently COVID-19. These infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality among this cohort. Quality infection prevention and control practice in residential aged care is therefore imperative. Although appointment of a dedicated infection prevention and control (IPC) lead in every Australian residential aged care facility is now mandated, all people working in this setting have a role to play in IPC. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed inadequacies in IPC in this sector and highlighted the need for interventions to improve implementation of best practice. Methods Using mixed methods, this four-phase implementation study will use theory-informed approaches to: (1) assess residential aged care facilities’ readiness for IPC practice change, (2) explore current practice using scenario-based assessments, (3) investigate barriers to best practice IPC, and (4) determine and evaluate feasible and locally tailored solutions to overcome the identified barriers. IPC leads will be upskilled and supported to operationalise the selected solutions. Staff working in residential aged care facilities, residents and their families will be recruited for participation in surveys and semi-structured interviews. Data will be analysed and triangulated at each phase, with findings informing the subsequent phases. Stakeholder groups at each facility and the IMMERSE project’s Reference Group will contribute to the interpretation of findings at each phase of the project. Discussion This multi-site study will comprehensively explore infection prevention and control practices in residential aged care. It will inform and support locally appropriate evidence-based strategies for enhancing infection prevention and control practice.

Abstract Introduction Arthroplasty is an effective, yet costly, surgical procedure for end‐stage osteoarthritis. Shorter stays in hospital are being piloted in Australia. In some countries, short stay is established practice, associated with improving perioperative care and enhanced recovery after surgery practices. Exploring the acceptability to patients of a short stay care pathway in hospital postarthroplasty is important for informing health policy, adoption and potential scalability of this model of care. Methods Consecutive patients at one site, at least 3 months post total joint arthroplasty, were invited to participate in theory‐informed semi‐structured qualitative interviews. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) informed development of the interview guide. Interview data were analysed using the Framework Method. Results Eighteen patients were invited. Fifteen consented to be contacted and were interviewed. Short‐stay post arthroplasty was highly acceptable to patients who had the supports necessary to recover safely at home. Key findings were as follows: flexibility of short‐stay care pathway was essential and valued; prior beliefs and expectations informed acceptability; and the absence of out‐of‐pocket expenses had an incentivizing effect, but was not the primary reason for patients choosing this care pathway. Further themes analysed within the TFA constructs highlighted nuances of acceptability relating to this model of care. Conclusions A short stay in hospital post arthroplasty appeared to be acceptable to patients who had experienced this care pathway. Our thematic findings identified aspects of the short‐stay care pathway that enhanced acceptability and some aspects that limited acceptability. These findings can inform refinement of the short‐stay care pathway. Patient or Public Contribution Patients/people with lived experience were not involved in the study design or conduct of this preliminary work; as this short‐stay model of care was recently introduced, only a small group of patients was eligible to participate in this study. This study is the first step towards understanding the experiences of patients about a short‐stay model of care post arthroplasty. The findings will help inform future patient and public involvement in expanding the programme.

Abstract Background The theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) was developed in response to recommendations that acceptability should be assessed in the design, evaluation and implementation phases of healthcare interventions. The TFA consists of seven component constructs (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy) that can help to identify characteristics of interventions that may be improved. The aim of this study was to develop a generic TFA questionnaire that can be adapted to assess acceptability of any healthcare intervention. Methods Two intervention-specific acceptability questionnaires based on the TFA were developed using a 5-step pre-validation method for developing patient-reported outcome instruments: 1) item generation; 2) item de-duplication; 3) item reduction and creation; 4) assessment of discriminant content validity against a pre-specified framework (TFA); 5) feedback from key stakeholders. Next, a generic TFA-based questionnaire was developed and applied to assess prospective and retrospective acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine. A think-aloud method was employed with two samples: 10 participants who self-reported intention to have the COVID-19 vaccine, and 10 participants who self-reported receiving a first dose of the vaccine. Results 1) The item pool contained 138 items, identified from primary papers included in an overview of reviews. 2) There were no duplicate items. 3) 107 items were discarded; 35 new items were created to maximise coverage of the seven TFA constructs. 4) 33 items met criteria for discriminant content validity and were reduced to two intervention-specific acceptability questionnaires, each with eight items. 5) Feedback from key stakeholders resulted in refinement of item wording, which was then adapted to develop a generic TFA-based questionnaire. For prospective and retrospective versions of the questionnaire, no participants identified problems with understanding and answering items reflecting four TFA constructs: affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, opportunity costs. Some participants encountered problems with items reflecting three constructs: ethicality, intervention coherence, self-efficacy. Conclusions A generic questionnaire for assessing intervention acceptability from the perspectives of intervention recipients was developed using methods for creating participant-reported outcome measures, informed by theory, previous research, and stakeholder input. The questionnaire provides researchers with an adaptable tool to measure acceptability across a range of healthcare interventions.

Abstract Background Acute low back pain is a common condition, has high burden, and there are evidence-to-practice gaps in the chiropractic and physiotherapy setting for imaging and giving advice to stay active. The aim of this cluster randomised trial was to estimate the effects of a theory- and evidence-based implementation intervention to increase chiropractors’ and physiotherapists’ adherence to a guideline for acute low back pain compared with the comparator (passive dissemination of the guideline). In particular, the primary aim of the intervention was to reduce inappropriate imaging referral and improve patient low back pain outcomes, and to determine whether this intervention was cost-effective. Methods Physiotherapy and chiropractic practices in the state of Victoria, Australia, comprising at least one practising clinician who provided care to patients with acute low back pain, were invited to participate. Patients attending these practices were included if they had acute non-specific low back pain (duration less than 3 months), were 18 years of age or older, and were able to understand and read English. Practices were randomly assigned either to a tailored, multi-faceted intervention based on the guideline (interactive educational symposium plus academic detailing) or passive dissemination of the guideline (comparator). A statistician independent of the study team undertook stratified randomisation using computer-generated random numbers; four strata were defined by professional group and the rural or metropolitan location of the practice. Investigators not involved in intervention delivery were blinded to allocation. Primary outcomes were X-ray referral self-reported by clinicians using a checklist and patient low back pain-specific disability (at 3 months). Results A total of 104 practices (43 chiropractors, 85 physiotherapists; 755 patients) were assigned to the intervention and 106 practices (45 chiropractors, 97 physiotherapists; 603 patients) to the comparator; 449 patients were available for the patient-level primary outcome. There was no important difference in the odds of patients being referred for X-ray (adjusted (Adj) OR: 1.40; 95% CI 0.51, 3.87; Adj risk difference (RD): 0.01; 95% CI − 0.02, 0.04) or patient low back pain-specific disability (Adj mean difference: 0.37; 95% CI − 0.48, 1.21, scale 0–24). The intervention did lead to improvement for some key secondary outcomes, including giving advice to stay active (Adj OR: 1.96; 95% CI 1.20, 3.22; Adj RD: 0.10; 95% CI 0.01, 0.19) and intending to adhere to the guideline recommendations (e.g. intention to refer for X-ray: Adj OR: 0.27; 95% CI 0.17, 0.44; intention to give advice to stay active: Adj OR: 2.37; 95% CI 1.51, 3.74). Conclusions Intervention group clinicians were more likely to give advice to stay active and to intend to adhere to the guideline recommendations about X-ray referral. The intervention did not change the primary study outcomes, with no important differences in X-ray referral and patient disability between groups, implying that hypothesised reductions in health service utilisation and/or productivity gains are unlikely to offset the direct costs of the intervention. We report these results with the caveat that we enrolled less patients into the trial than our determined sample size. We cannot recommend this intervention as a cost-effective use of resources. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609001022257 . Retrospectively registered on 25 November 2009

Abstract Background Implementation research may play an important role in reducing research waste by identifying strategies that support translation of evidence into practice. Implementation of healthcare interventions is influenced by multiple factors including the organisational context, implementation strategies and features of the intervention as perceived by people delivering and receiving the intervention. Recently, concepts relating to perceived features of interventions have been gaining traction in published literature, namely, acceptability, fidelity, feasibility, scalability and sustainability. These concepts may influence uptake of healthcare interventions, yet there seems to be little consensus about their nature and impact. The aim of this paper is to develop a testable conceptual framework of implementability of healthcare interventions that includes these five concepts. Methods A multifaceted approach was used to develop and refine a conceptual framework of implementability of healthcare interventions. An overview of reviews identified reviews published between January 2000 and March 2021 that focused on at least one of the five concepts in relation to a healthcare intervention. These findings informed the development of a preliminary framework of implementability of healthcare interventions which was presented to a panel of experts. A nominal group process was used to critique, refine and agree on a final framework. Results A total of 252 publications were included in the overview of reviews. Of these, 32% were found to be feasible, 4% reported sustainable changes in practice and 9% were scaled up to other populations and/or settings. The expert panel proposed that scalability and sustainability of a healthcare intervention are dependent on its acceptability, fidelity and feasibility. Furthermore, acceptability, fidelity and feasibility require re-evaluation over time and as the intervention is developed and then implemented in different settings or with different populations. The final agreed framework of implementability provides the basis for a chronological, iterative approach to planning for wide-scale, long-term implementation of healthcare interventions. Conclusions We recommend that researchers consider the factors acceptability, fidelity and feasibility (proposed to influence sustainability and scalability) during the preliminary phases of intervention development, evaluation and implementation, and iteratively check these factors in different settings and over time.

BackgroundMobile health interventions delivered through mobile apps are increasingly used in physiotherapy care. This may be because of the potential of apps to facilitate changes in behavior, which is central to the aims of care delivered by physiotherapists. A benefit of using apps is their ability to incorporate behavior change techniques (BCTs) that can optimize the effectiveness of physiotherapeutic interventions. Research continues to suggest that despite their importance, behavior change strategies are often missing in patient management. Evaluating mobile apps that physiotherapists can use to drive behavior change may inform clinical practice and potentially improve patient outcomes. Examining the quality of apps and exploring their key features that can support behavior change and physiotherapy care are important aspects of such an evaluation. ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study was to describe the range of mobile apps in app stores that are intended for use by patients to support physiotherapy care. The secondary aims were to assess app quality, BCTs, and their behavior change potential. MethodsA systematic review of mobile apps in app stores was undertaken. The Apple App Store and Google Play were searched using a 2-step search strategy, using terms relevant to the physiotherapy discipline. Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied: apps had to be intended for use by patients and be self-contained (or stand-alone) without the requirement to be used in conjunction with a partner wearable device or another plugin. Included apps were coded for BCTs using the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy version 1. App quality was assessed using the Mobile App Rating Scale, and the App Behavior Change Scale was used to assess the app’s potential to change behavior. ResultsIn total, 1240 apps were screened, and 35 were included. Of these 35 apps, 22 (63%) were available on both the Apple App Store and Google Play platforms. In total, 24 (69%) were general in their focus (eg, not condition-specific), with the remaining 11 (31%) being more specific (eg, knee rehabilitation and pelvic floor training). The mean app quality score (Mobile App Rating Scale) was 3.7 (SD 0.4) of 5 (range 2.8-4.5). The mean number of BCTs identified per app was 8.5 (SD 3.6). BCTs most frequently included in the apps were instruction on how to perform a behavior (n=32), action planning (n=30), and self-monitoring of behavior (n=28). The mean behavior change potential score (App Behavior Change Scale) was 8.5 (SD 3.1) of 21 (range 3-15). ConclusionsMobile apps available to support patient care received from a physiotherapist are of variable quality. Although they contain some BCTs, the potential for behavior change varied widely across apps. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.2196/29047

Objective The ‘To Dip or Not to Dip’ (TDONTD) intervention aims to reduce antibiotic prescribing for urinary tract infection (UTI) by reducing low-value dipstick testing. The aims of this study were to use a qualitative approach to (1) evaluate potential influences on the delivery of the TDONTD intervention in Australian residential aged care homes (RACHs) by identifying perceived barriers and enablers to delivery and acceptance; and (2) propose intervention strategies to address barriers and enhance enablers.Design A qualitative before–after process evaluation of a multisite implementation study using interviews with nurse and pharmacist implementers.Setting This study was conducted in 12 Australian RACHs.Participants Participants included 17 on-site nurse champions and 4 pharmacists (existing contracted providers).Intervention Resources from England’s TDONTD intervention were adapted for an Australian context. Key resources delivered were case-based education, staff training video, clinical pathway and an audit tool.Results Key barriers to TDONTD were beliefs about nursing capabilities in diagnosing infection, beliefs about consequences (fear of missing infection) and social influences (pressure from family, doctors and hospitals). Key enablers were perceived increased nurse and carer knowledge (around UTI and asymptomatic bacteriuria), resources from a credible source, empowerment of nurse champions to apply knowledge and skills in delivering operational change initiatives, pharmacist-delivered education and organisational policy or process change. Of TDONTD’s key components, the clinical pathway substituted dipstick testing in diagnosing UTI, delivery of case-based education was enhanced by their attendance and support of the intervention and the antibiotic audit tool generated feedback that champions shared with staff.Conclusions Our study confirms the core components of TDONTD and strategies to enhance delivery and overcome barriers. To further reduce barriers to TDONTD, broader advocacy work is required to raise awareness of dipstick testing as a low-value test in older persons and by linking it to healthcare professionals and consumer education.

Introduction With treatment-related improvements in survival, rehabilitation is essential to improve function and health-related quality of life and manage the high symptom burden associated with lung cancer. Despite this, significant heterogeneity exists in the outcomes and instruments used to evaluate lung cancer rehabilitation programme impact. This study aims to develop a core set of clinically relevant lung cancer rehabilitation outcomes for use in clinical practice.Methods and analysis An international Delphi consensus study involving consumer, healthcare professional and researcher stakeholders to determine which outcomes to include and how to measure these. Stage 1 (preliminary): mixed methods to develop the potential list of outcomes (1) overview of systematic reviews of lung cancer exercise interventions and (2) focus groups and individual interviews with people with lung cancer. Stage 2: outcomes were grouped according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health domains. Stage 3: to determine priority outcomes for core outcome set (COS) inclusion participants will rate each outcome’s importance (one-nine-point Likert scale) over two-three survey rounds. Stage 4: following review by the steering committee, a consensus meeting will be held if agreement on the COS has not been reached.Stage 5: recommendations will be made regarding a single instrument for measuring each COS outcome by reviewing existing resources where consensus has already been reached. Where resources do not exist the quality and feasibility of potential measurement instruments will be appraised, and the Delphi consensus survey and meeting process outlined in stages 3–4 will be repeated.This protocol adheres to the COS-Standardised Protocol statement and will be conducted and reported according to the COS-Standards for Development recommendations and the COS-Standards for Reporting.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval (20/9/22, University of Melbourne ID 2022-24839-32231-3). Dissemination in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations.

BackgroundCare delivered by physiotherapists aims to facilitate engagement in positive health behaviors by patients (eg, adherence to exercise). However, research suggests that behavioral interventions are frequently omitted from care. Hence, better understanding of strategies that can be used by physiotherapists to support patients to engage in positive behaviors is important and likely to optimize outcomes. Digital health interventions delivered via mobile apps are garnering attention for their ability to support behavior change. They have potential to incorporate numerous behavior change techniques (BCTs) to support goals of physiotherapy care, including but not limited to self-monitoring, goal setting, and prompts/alerts. Despite their potential to support physiotherapy care, much is still unknown about what apps are available to consumers, the BCTs they use, their quality, and their potential to change behaviors. ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study is to systematically review the mobile apps available in app stores that are intended for use by patients to support physiotherapy care, including the BCTs within these apps. The secondary aims are to evaluate the quality and behavior change potential of these apps. MethodsA systematic review of mobile apps in app stores will be undertaken. This will be guided by recommendations for systematic reviews in line with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement but adapted to suit our app store search, consistent with similar systematic reviews of apps published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research. Apple Store and Google Play will be searched with a two-step search strategy, using terms relevant to physiotherapy, physiotherapists, and common physiotherapy care. Key eligibility criteria will include apps that are intended for use by patients and are self-contained or stand-alone without the need of additional wearable devices or other add-ons. Included apps will be coded for BCTs and rated for quality using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) and for potential to change behavior using the App Behavior Change Scale (ABACUS). ResultsApp store search and screening are expected to be completed in 2021. Data extraction and quality appraisal are expected to commence by November 2021. The study results are expected to be published in a subsequent paper in 2022. ConclusionsKnowledge gained from this review will support clinical practice and inform research by providing a greater understanding of the quality of currently available mobile apps and their potential to support patient behavior change goals of physiotherapy care. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)PRR1-10.2196/29047

Background: Co-design with consumers and healthcare professionals is widely used in applied health research. While this approach appears to be ethically the right thing to do, a rigorous evaluation of its process and impact is frequently missing. Evaluation of research co-design is important to identify areas of improvement in the methods and processes, as well as to determine whether research co-design leads to better outcomes. We aimed to build on current literature to develop a framework to assist researchers with the evaluation of co-design processes and impacts., Methods: A multifaceted, iterative approach, including three steps, was undertaken to develop a Co-design Evaluation Framework: 1) A systematic overview of reviews; 2) Stakeholder panel meetings to discuss and debate findings from the overview of reviews and 3) Consensus meeting with stakeholder panel. The systematic overview of reviews included relevant papers published between 2000 and 2022. OVID (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO), EBSCOhost (Cinahl) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews were searched for papers that reported co-design evaluation or outcomes in health research. Extracted data was inductively analysed and evaluation themes were identified. Review findings were presented to a stakeholder panel, including consumers, healthcare professionals and researchers, to interpret and critique. A consensus meeting, including a nominal group technique, was applied to agree upon the Co-design Evaluation Framework., Results: A total of 51 reviews were included in the systematic overview of reviews. Fifteen evaluation themes were identified and grouped into the following seven clusters: People (within co-design group), group processes, research processes, co-design context, people (outside co-design group), system and sustainment. If evaluation methods were mentioned, they mainly included qualitative data, informal consumer feedback and researchers' reflections. The Co-Design Evaluation Framework used a tree metaphor to represent the processes and people in the co-design group (below-ground), underpinning system- and people-level outcomes beyond the co-design group (above-ground). To evaluate research co-design, researchers may wish to consider any or all components in the tree., Conclusions: The Co-Design Evaluation Framework has been collaboratively developed with various stakeholders to be used prospectively (planning for evaluation), concurrently (making adjustments during the co-design process) and retrospectively (reviewing past co-design efforts to inform future activities)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Advanced cancer significantly impacts patients' and family caregivers' quality of life. When patients and caregivers are supported concurrently as a dyad, the well-being of each person is optimized. Family, Outlook, Communication, Uncertainty, Symptom management (FOCUS) is a dyadic, psychoeducational intervention developed in the United States, shown to improve the well-being and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer and their primary caregivers. Originally, a nurse-delivered in-person intervention, FOCUS has been adapted into a self-administered web-based intervention for European delivery., Objective: The aims of this study are to (1) adapt FOCUS to the Australian context (FOCUSau); (2) evaluate the effectiveness of FOCUSau in improving the emotional well-being and self-efficacy of patients with advanced cancer and their primary caregiver relative to usual care control group; (3) compare health care use between the intervention and control groups; and (4) assess the acceptability, feasibility, and scalability of FOCUSau in order to inform future maintainable implementation of the intervention within the Australian health care system., Methods: FOCUS will be adapted prior to trial commencement, using an iterative stakeholder feedback process to create FOCUSau. To examine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of FOCUSau and assess its acceptability, feasibility, and scalability, we will undertake a hybrid type 1 implementation study consisting of a phase 3 (clinical effectiveness) trial along with an observational implementation study. Participants will include patients with cancer who are older than 18 years, able to access the internet, and able to identify a primary support person or caregiver who can also be approached for participation. The sample size consists of 173 dyads in each arm (ie, 346 dyads in total). Patient-caregiver dyad data will be collected at 3 time points-baseline (T 0 ) completed prerandomization; first follow-up (T 1 ; N=346) at 12 weeks post baseline; and second follow-up (T 2 ) at 24 weeks post baseline., Results: The study was funded in March 2022. Recruitment commenced in July 2024., Conclusions: If shown to be effective, this intervention will improve the well-being of patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers, regardless of their location or current level of health care support., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06082128; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06082128., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/55252., (©Peter Hudson, Jill Francis, Joachim Cohen, Suzanne Kapp, Richard De Abreu Lourenco, Lisa Beatty, Kathleen Gray, Michael Jefford, Ilona Juraskova, Laurel Northouse, Aline de Vleminck, Sungwon Chang, Patsy Yates, Sophy Athan, Shaira Baptista, Marlena Klaic, Jennifer Philip. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 13.08.2024.)

Purpose: Nutrition is essential within cancer care, yet patient and carer access to nutrition care and information is variable. This study aimed to (1) investigate patient and carer access and perceptions, and health professional views and practices, relating to cancer nutrition information and care; and (2) co-design interactive resources to support optimal nutrition care., Methods: Patients and carers completed a survey regarding access to nutrition care and information. Seven multidisciplinary health service teams were invited to participate in a survey and focus group to assess barriers and enablers in nutrition practices. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed and thematically analyzed. Eligible patients, carers, and health professionals were invited to four virtual workshops utilizing experience-based co-design methods to identify nutrition priority areas and design resources. Workshop participant acceptability of the resources was measured., Results: Of 104 consumer survey respondents (n = 97 patients, n = 7 carers), 61% agreed that it "took too much time to find evidence-based nutrition and cancer information", and 46% had seen a dietitian. Thirty-four of 38 health professionals completed the survey and 30 participated in a focus group, and it was identified the greatest barriers to delivering nutrition care were lack of referral services, knowledge or skill gaps, and time. Twenty participants (n = 10 patients and carers, n = 10 health professionals) attended four workshops and co-designed a suite of 46 novel resources rated as highly acceptable., Conclusion: Improved communication, training, and availability of suitable resources could improve access to and support cancer nutrition information and care. New, co-designed cancer nutrition resources were created and deemed highly acceptable to patients, carers, and health professionals., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: New nurses report feeling unprepared and having low levels of self-confidence. High-fidelity simulation (HFS) is frequently used to increase confidence and improve patient safety. This study assessed whether HFS training increased new nurses' self-confidence and activation of the rapid response team (RRT) when caring for patients with clinical deterioration., Method: A quality improvement design was used. New nurses on two units at a Level I trauma center completed a 70-minute HFS. The change in self-confidence was measured by Grundy's C-Scale, and the change in percentage of staff-initiated RRT calls versus auto-triggered calls was calculated 3 months after HFS., Results: All 12 nurses who participated in the HFS showed improved self-confidence immediately after simulation. A Wilcox-on signed-rank paired data test showed statistically significantly improved confidence scores for all five items of the C-Scale from preintervention to immediately postintervention as well as 5 months later. One unit showed an increase in percentage of staff-initiated RRT calls 3 months postsimulation, and the other unit showed a decline in staff-initiated versus auto-triggered RRT calls., Discussion: The HFS increased self-confidence scores from preintervention to immediately postintervention, with the increase sustained 5 months later. However, how this increase translated into practice when activating RRT calls cannot be determined because many factors can influence RRT call patterns., Conclusion: The literature review and study results suggest that HFS training embedded into an existing nurse residency program can build self-confidence in caring for patients with clinical deterioration. [ J Contin Educ Nurs. 2023;54(8):367-376.] .

Question: What is the effect of therapeutic exercise or tailored physical activity programs supported by a mobile app (compared with exercise or physical activity programs delivered using other modes) for people with musculoskeletal pain conditions?, Design: Systematic review of published randomised controlled trials with meta-analysis., Participants: People of all ages with musculoskeletal pain conditions., Intervention: Therapeutic exercise or tailored physical activity programs supported by a mobile app., Outcome Measures: Pain intensity, pain interference, self-reported physical function, physical performance, adherence, psychosocial outcomes, health-related quality of life, work participation, physical activity, goal attainment and satisfaction., Results: Eleven studies were eligible for inclusion, with a total of 845 participants. There was low certainty evidence that using mobile apps to deliver exercise programs helps to reduce pain intensity to a worthwhile extent (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.27). There was low certainty evidence that using mobile apps to deliver exercise programs helps to improve self-reported physical function to a worthwhile extent (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.27). Although the effect of using mobile apps to deliver exercise programs on pain interference was also estimated to be a worthwhile benefit (SMD -0.66), this estimate came with marked uncertainty (95% CI -1.52 to 0.19) so the effect remains unclear. The remainder of the outcomes were unclear due to sparse evidence. The most common behaviour change intervention functions in the mobile app interventions were: training, enablement and environmental restructuring., Conclusion: Mobile apps supporting therapeutic exercise or tailored physical activity programs for musculoskeletal pain conditions may help in reducing pain intensity and improving physical function. The mobile apps utilised a limited range of behaviour change intervention functions., Registration: CRD42021248046., (Copyright © 2022 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Auditing and feedback are frequently used to improve patient care. However, it remains unclear how to optimize feedback effectiveness for the appropriate use of treatments such as blood transfusion, a common but costly procedure that is more often overused than underused., Objective: To evaluate 2 theoretically informed feedback interventions to improve the appropriate use of blood transfusions., Design, Setting, and Participants: Two sequential, linked 2 × 2 cluster randomized trials were performed in hospitals in the UK participating in national audits of transfusion for perioperative anemia and management of hematological disorders. Data were collected for a surgical trial from October 1, 2014, to October 31, 2016, with follow-up completed on October 31, 2016. Data were collected for a hematological trial through follow-up from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2017. Trial data were analyzed from November 1, 2016, to June 1, 2019., Interventions: Hospitals were randomized to standard content or enhanced content to improve feedback clarity and usability and to standard support or enhanced support for staff to act on feedback., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was appropriateness of transfusions audited at 12 months. Secondary end points included volume of transfusions (aiming for reductions at patient and cluster levels) and transfusion-related adverse events and reactions., Results: One hundred thirty-five of 152 eligible clusters participated in the surgical audit (2714 patients; mean [SD] age, 74.9 [14.0] years; 1809 women [66.7%]), and 134 of 141 participated in the hematological audit (4439 patients; median age, 72.0 [IQR, 64.0-80.0] years; 2641 men [59.5%]). Fifty-seven of 69 clusters (82.6%) in the surgical audit randomized to enhanced content downloaded reports compared with 52 of 66 clusters (78.8%) randomized to standard reports. Fifty-nine of 68 clusters (86.8%) randomized to enhanced support logged onto the toolkit. The proportion of patients with appropriate transfusions was 0.184 for standard content and 0.176 for enhanced content (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.91 [97.5% CI, 0.61-1.36]) and 0.181 for standard support and 0.180 for enhanced support (adjusted OR, 1.05 [97.5% CI, 0.68-1.61]). For the hematological audit, 53 of 66 clusters (80.3%) randomized to enhanced content downloaded the reports compared with 53 of 68 clusters (77.9%) randomized to standard content. Forty-nine of 67 clusters sites (73.1%) assigned to enhanced support logged into the toolkit at least once. The proportion of patients with appropriate transfusions was 0.744 for standard content and 0.714 for enhanced content (adjusted OR, 0.81 [97.5% CI, 0.56-1.12]), and 0.739 for standard support and 0.721 for enhanced support (adjusted OR, 0.96 [97.5% CI, 0.67-1.38])., Conclusions and Relevance: This comparison of cluster randomized trials found that interventions to improve feedback usability and guide local action were no more effective than standard feedback in increasing the appropriate use of blood transfusions. Auditing and feedback delivered at scale is a complex and costly program; therefore, effective responses may depend on developing robust local quality improvement arrangements, which can be evaluated using rigorous experimental designs embedded within national programs., Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN15490813.

Background: Audit and feedback entails systematic documentation of clinical performance based on explicit criteria or standards which is then fed back to professionals in a structured manner. There are potential significant returns on investment from partnerships between existing clinical audit programmes in coordinated programmes of research to test ways of improving the effect of their feedback to drive greater improvements in health care delivery and population outcomes. We explored barriers to and enablers of embedding audit and feedback trials within clinical audit programmes., Methods: We purposively recruited participants with varied experience in embedded trials in audit programmes. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews, guided by behavioural theory, with researchers, clinical audit programme staff and health care professionals. Recorded interviews were transcribed, and data coded and thematically analysed., Results: We interviewed 31 participants (9 feedback researchers, 14 audit staff and 8 healthcare professionals, many having dual roles). We identified barriers and enablers for all 14 theoretical domains but no relationship between domains and participant role. We identified four optimal conditions for sustainable collaboration from the perspectives of stakeholders: resources, that is, recognition that audit programmes need to create capacity to participate in research, and research must be adapted to fit within each programme's constraints; logistics, namely, that partnerships need to address data sharing and audit quality, while securing research funding to ensure operational success; leadership, that is, enthusiastic and engaged audit programme leaders must motivate their team and engage local stakeholders; and relationships, meaning that trust between researchers and audit programmes must be established over time by identifying shared priorities and meeting each partner's needs., Conclusion: Successfully embedding research within clinical audit programmes is likely to require compromise, logistical expertise, leadership and trusting relationships to overcome perceived risks and fully realise benefits.