Back to Search Start Over

Acceptability and appropriateness of a clinical pathway for managing anxiety and depression in cancer patients: a mixed methods study of staff perspectives

Authors :
Phyllis Butow
Heather L. Shepherd
Jessica Cuddy
Marnie Harris
Sharon He
Lindy Masya
Mona Faris
Nicole M. Rankin
Philip Beale
Afaf Girgis
Brian Kelly
Peter Grimison
The ADAPT Program Group
Joanne Shaw
Source :
BMC Health Services Research, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-14 (2021), BMC Health Services Research
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
BMC, 2021.

Abstract

Background Clinical pathways (CPs) can improve health outcomes, but to be sustainable, must be deemed acceptable and appropriate by staff. A CP for screening and management of anxiety and depression in cancer patients (the ADAPT CP) was implemented in 12 Australian oncology services for 12 months, within a cluster randomised controlled trial of core versus enhanced implementation strategies. This paper compares staff-perceived acceptability and appropriateness of the ADAPT CP across study arms. Methods Multi-disciplinary lead teams at each service tailored, planned, championed and implemented the CP. Staff at participating services, purposively selected for diversity, completed a survey and participated in an interview prior to implementation (T0), and at midpoint (6 months: T1) and end (12 months: T2) of implementation. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Results Seven metropolitan and 5 regional services participated. Questionnaires were completed by 106, 58 and 57 staff at T0, T1 and T2 respectively. Eighty-eight staff consented to be interviewed at T0, with 89 and 76 at T1 and T2 (response rates 70%, 66% and 57%, respectively). Acceptability/appropriateness, on the quantitative measure, was high at T0 (mean of 31/35) and remained at that level throughout the study, with no differences between staff from core versus enhanced services. Perceived burden was relatively low (mean of 11/20) with no change over time. Lowest scores and greatest variability pertained to perceived impact on workload, time and cost. Four major themes were identified: 1) Mental health is an important issue which ADAPT addresses; 2) ADAPT helps staff deliver best care, and reduces staff stress; 3) ADAPT is fit for purpose, for both cancer care services and patients; 4) ADAPT: a catalyst for change. Opposing viewpoints are outlined. Conclusions This study demonstrated high staff-perceived acceptability and appropriateness of the ADAPT CP with regards to its focus, evidence-base, utility to staff and patients, and ability to create change. However, concerns remained regarding burden on staff and time commitment. Strategies from a policy and managerial level will likely be required to overcome the latter issues. Trial registration The study was registered prospectively with the ANZCTR on 22/3/2017. Trial ID ACTRN12617000411347. https://www.anzctr.org.au/.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
14726963
Volume :
21
Issue :
1
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
BMC Health Services Research
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....4cf07c17c73131c3be16e4332fc8ff8b