Search

Thirty-one family physicians, from 19 primary care teams in Biscay (Spain), were randomly assigned to intervention or control group. The 15 intervention family physicians, after training in primary bereavement care, saw 43 widows for 7 sessions, from the 4th to 13th month after their loss. The 16 control family physicians, without primary bereavement care training, saw 44 widows for 7 ordinary appointments, with the same schedule. Outcome measures were collected at 4, 10, 16, and 24 months after the loss. A linear mixed model was used. No significant differences were found in favor of the intervention group on grief, and indeed control group widows experienced more improvement in somatization, general health, and general emotional outcomes. (Contains 3 tables and 3 figures.)

Abstract Background The adoption of a healthy lifestyle, including physical activity, a balanced diet, a moderate alcohol consumption and abstinence from smoking, are associated with large decreases in the incidence and mortality rates for the most common chronic diseases. That is why primary health care (PHC) services are trying, so far with less success than desirable, to promote healthy lifestyles among patients. The objective of this study is to design and model, under a participative collaboration framework between clinicians and researchers, interventions that are feasible and sustainable for the promotion of healthy lifestyles in PHC. Methods and design Phase I formative research and a quasi-experimental evaluation of the modelling and planning process will be undertaken in eight primary care centres (PCCs) of the Basque Health Service – OSAKIDETZA, of which four centres will be assigned for convenience to the Intervention Group (the others being Controls). Twelve structured study, discussion and consensus sessions supported by reviews of the literature and relevant documents, will be undertaken throughout 12 months. The first four sessions, including a descriptive strategic needs assessment, will lead to the prioritisation of a health promotion aim in each centre. In the remaining eight sessions, collaborative design of intervention strategies, on the basis of a planning process and pilot trials, will be carried out. The impact of the formative process on the practice of healthy lifestyle promotion, attitude towards health promotion and other factors associated with the optimisation of preventive clinical practice will be assessed, through pre- and post-programme evaluations and comparisons of the indicators measured in professionals from the centres assigned to the Intervention or Control Groups. Discussion There are four necessary factors for the outcome to be successful and result in important changes: (1) the commitment of professional and community partners who are involved; (2) their competence for change; (3) the active cooperation and participation of the interdisciplinary partners involved throughout the process of change; and (4) the availability of resources necessary to facilitate the change.

Background: Evidence-based interventions are more likely to be adopted if practitioners collaborate with researchers to develop an implementation strategy. This paper describes the steps to plan and execute a strategy, including the development of structure and supports needed for implementing proven health promotion interventions in primary and community care. Results: Between 10 and 13 discussion and consensus sessions were performed in four highly-motivated primary health care centers involving 80% of the primary care staff and 21 community-based organizations. All four centers chose to address physical activity, diet, and smoking. They selected the 5 A's evidence-based clinical intervention to be adapted to the context of the health centers. The planned implementation strategy worked at multiple levels: bottom-up primary care organizational change, top-down support from managers, community involvement, and the development of innovative e-health information and communication tools. Shared decision making and practice facilitation were perceived as the most positive aspects of the collaborative modeling process, which took more time than expected, especially the development of the new e-health tools integrated into electronic health records. Conclusions: Collaborative modeling of an implementation strategy for the integration of health promotion in primary and community care was feasible in motivated centers. However, it was difficult, being hindered by the heavy workload in primary care and generating uncertainty inherent to a bottom-up decision making processes. Lessons from this experience could be useful in diverse settings and for other clinical interventions. Two companion papers report the evaluation of its feasibility and assess quantitatively and qualitatively the implementation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Process evaluation is recommended to improve the understanding of underlying mechanisms related to clinicians, patients, context and intervention delivery that may impact on trial or program results, feasibility and transferability to practice. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the Prescribe Healthy Life (PVS from the Spanish "Prescribe Vida Saludable") implementation strategy for enhancing the adoption and implementation of an evidence-based health promotion intervention in primary health care. Methods: A descriptive study of 2-year implementation indicators for the PVS clinical intervention was conducted in four primary health care centers. A multifaceted collaborative modeling implementation strategy was developed to enhance the integration of a clinical intervention to promote healthy lifestyles into clinical practice. Process indicators were assessed for intervention reach, adoption, implementation, sustainability and their variability at center, practice, and patient levels. Results: Mean rates of adoption by means of active collaboration among the three main professional categories (family physicians, nurses and administrative personnel) were 75% in all centers. Just over half of the patients that attended (n = 11650; 51.9%) were reached in terms of having their lifestyle habits assessed, while more than a third (33.7%; n = 7433) and almost 10% (n = 2175) received advice or a printed prescription for at least one lifestyle change, respectively. Only 3.7% of the target population received a repeat prescription. These process indicators significantly (p < 0.001) varied by center, lifestyle habit and patient characteristics. Sustainability of intervention components changed thorough the implementation period within centers. Conclusions: The implementation strategy used showed moderate-to-good performance on process indicators related to adoption, reach, and implementation of the evidence-based healthy lifestyle promotion intervention in the context of routine primary care. Sources of heterogeneity and instability in these indicators may improve our understanding of factors required to attain adequate program adoption and implementation through improved implementation strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The impact of lifestyle on health is undeniable and effective healthy lifestyle promotion interventions do exist. However, this is not a fundamental part of routine primary care clinical practice. We describe factors that determine changes in performance of primary health care centers involved in piloting the health promotion innovation 'Prescribe Vida Saludable' (PVS) phase II. Methods: We engaged four primary health care centers of the Basque Healthcare Service in an action research project aimed at changing preventive health practices. Prescribe Healthy Life (PVS from the Spanish "Prescribe Vida Saludable) is focused on designing, planning, implementing and evaluating innovative programs to promote multiple healthy habits, feasible to be performed in routine primary health care conditions. After 2 years of piloting, centers were categorized as having high, medium, or low implementation effectiveness. We completed qualitative inductive and deductive analysis of five focus groups with the staff of the centers. Themes generated through consensual grounded qualitative analysis were compared between centers to identify the dimensions that explain the variation in actual implementation of PVS, and retrospectively organized and assessed against the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: Of the 36 CFIR constructs, 11 were directly related to the level of implementation performance: intervention source, evidence strength and quality, adaptability, design quality and packaging, tension for change, learning climate, self-efficacy, planning, champions, executing, and reflecting and evaluating, with --organizational tracking added as a new sub-construct. Additionally, another seven constructs emerged in the participants' discourse but were not related to center performance: relative advantage, complexity, patients' needs and resources, external policy and incentives, structural characteristics, available resources, and formally appointed internal implementation leaders. Our findings indicate that the success of the implementation seems to be associated with the following components: the context, the implementation process, and the collaborative modelling. Conclusions: Identifying barriers and enablers is useful for designing implementation strategies for health promotion in primary health care centers that are essential for innovation success. An implementation model is proposed to highlight the relationships between the CFIR constructs in the context of health promotion in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Feasible and valid assessment of healthy behaviors is the first step for integrating health promotion in routine primary care. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the validity and reliability of the "prescribe healthy life" screening questionnaire, a brief tool for detecting physical activity levels, consumption of fruit and vegetables, tobacco use and patients' compliance with minimal recommendations. Methods: An observational cross-sectional study to determine the reliability and validity of this questionnaire by means of mixed (qualitative and quantitative) methods. Thirteen healthcare professionals designed the questionnaire. One hundred and twenty-six patients from three primary care health centers within Osakidetza (Basque Health Service, Spain) filled in the "Prescribe Healthy Life" Screening Questionnaire and completed an accelerometry record, the PREDIMED Food Frequency Questionnaire and a co-oximetry as gold standards for physical activity, dietary intake and tobacco use, respectively. Correlations, sensitivities, specificities, likelihood ratios and test-retest reliability were calculated. Additionally, the feasibility and utility of the questionnaire were evaluated. Results: Both reliability and concurrent validity for the consumption of fruit and vegetables (rspearman = 0.59, rspearman = 0.50) and tobacco use (rspearman = 0.76, r = 0.69) as their overall performance in the detection of unhealthy diet (accuracy = 76.8%, LR + = 3.1 and LR- = 0.31) and smokers (accuracy = 86.8%, LR + = 6.1 and LR- = 0.05) were good. Meanwhile, the reproducibility (0.38), the correlation between the minutes of physical activity (0.34) and LR+ (1.00) for detection of physical activity were low. On average the questionnaire was considered by patients easy to understand, easy to fill in, short (5-6 min) and useful. Conclusion: The "Prescribe Healthy Life" Screening Questionnaire, PVS-SQ, has proved to be a simple and practical tool for use in the actual context of primary care, with guarantees of validity and reliability for the diet and tobacco scales. However, the physical activity scale show unsatisfactory results, and alternative questions ought to be tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]