Implementing PCR testing in general practice-a qualitative study using normalization process theory.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic brought attention to a need for rapid testing of large populations. Experiences from community-based testing settings show that there can be workload difficulties, logistical challenges and socioeconomic downsides to large scale Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) testing. Alternative testing arenas have therefore been considered. Rapid point-of-care (POC) PCR test methods have since been developed and could have potential to surveille viral respiratory infections. It is, however, unknown if PCR testing can be successfully implemented routinely in general practice. The aim of this study was to assess factors that enable and inhibit the implementation of point-of-care PCR testing for acute respiratory tract infection in general practice. METHODS: Fourteen general practices in the east Zealand area in Denmark were included in the study and given access to POC PCR testing equipment during a flu season. The participating clinics were initially trained in the use of a POC PCR testing device and then spent 6 weeks testing it. We conducted qualitative interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and their staff, before and after the testing period, specifically focusing on their clinical decision-making and internal collaboration in relation to POC PCR testing. We used normalization process theory to design the interview guides and to analyze the data. RESULTS: Professionals reported no clinical need for a POC PCR testing device in a non-pandemic clinical setting. Results were delivered faster, but this was only timesaving for the patient and not the GP, who had to perform more tasks. CONCLUSION: In its current form, the added diagnostic value of using POC PCR testing in general practice was not sufficient for the professionals to justify the increased work connected to the usage of the diagnostic procedure in daily practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: n/a.

Quality clusters in general practice: associations between cluster organization and general practitioners' self-reported benefits.

BACKGROUND: Quality clusters were introduced as a quality improvement concept in Danish general practice in 2018. This new concept anchored quality improvement in local clusters managed by general practitioners (GPs). OBJECTIVES: To describe the cluster organization and GPs' self-reported benefits of participating in them and explore the associations between cluster organization and self-reported benefits. METHODS: A national survey in Danish general practice gathering information about cluster organization (cluster size, cluster meetings, participants, and content) and GPs' self-reported benefits (overall benefit, internal changes in the clinic, and improved external collaboration). RESULTS: One hundred and eight (95%) clusters and 1,219 GPs (36%) were included. Cluster size varied from 10 to 68 GPs (34 GPs on average). Approximately 70% of GPs reported moderate to very high overall benefit from cluster participation. Most GPs experienced changes in their clinic organization (68%), drug prescriptions (78%), and patient care (77%). Collaboration was reported improved between the GPs (86%), municipality (50%), and hospital (36.2%). GPs in clusters with 3-6 planned meetings per year (odds ratio [OR] 1.9; confidence interval [CI] 1.3-2.9), mixed meeting types (OR 1.7; CI 1.2-2.4), group work (OR 1.7; CI 1.1-2.5), and use of guidelines in their meetings (OR 1.8; CI 1.3-2.4) had statistically significantly higher odds for reporting overall benefit of participating in clusters compared with GPs in clusters without these characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent and active meetings with a relevant meeting content are positively related to GPs' perceived benefits and with improved collaboration between GPs in the clusters. There seems to be a potential for developing collaboration with other healthcare providers.

Implementing an intervention to reduce use of antibiotics for suspected urinary tract infection in nursing homes - a qualitative study of barriers and enablers based on Normalization Process Theory.

BACKGROUND: Overuse of antibiotics in the elderly population is contributing to the global health problem of antibiotic resistance. Hence, it is important to improve prescribing practices in care facilities for elderly residents. In nursing homes, urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common reason for antibiotic prescription but inappropriate prescriptions are frequent. In order to reduce the use of antibiotics for suspected urinary tract infection in this context, a complex intervention based on education as well as tools for reflection and communication had been developed and trialed in a group of nursing homes. The presents study explored the barriers and enablers in implementing this complex intervention. METHODS: After the intervention trial period, a qualitative interview study was performed in six of the nursing homes that had received the intervention. The study included 12 informants: One senior manager, four nurses, six healthcare assistants, and one healthcare helper. Normalization Process Theory was used to structure the interviews as well as the analysis. RESULTS: The intervention was well received among the informants in terms of its purpose and content. The initial educational session had altered the informants' perceptions of UTI and of the need for adopting a different approach to suspected UTIs. Also, the study participants generally experienced that the intervention had positively impacted their practice. The most important barrier was that some of the interventions' clinical content was difficult to understand for the staff. This contributed to some problems with engaging all relevant staff in the intervention and with using the observation tool correctly in practice. Here, nurses played a key role in the implementation process by regularly explaining and discussing the intervention with other staff. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that it is possible to implement more evidence-based practices concerning antibiotics use in nursing homes by employing a combination of educational activities and supportive tools directed at nursing home staff.

The survey visit as a key evaluative event in accreditation-a qualitative study of survey visit experiences among surveyors and general practice professionals.

BACKGROUND: Accreditation is a widely employed quality assurance concept in health care and the survey visit is the central method for assessing participating organisations' compliance with accreditation standards. Despite this, research on the survey visit as a method for assessing compliance is scarce. In Denmark a mandatory accreditation programme was introduced for general practice clinics in 2016. We performed a qualitative, explorative study of the reflections and actions of surveyors and general practice professionals (GPs and staff) concerning the production of information about compliance with the accreditation standards in relation to the survey visit. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with GPs and staff from general practices in two Danish regions before and after their survey visit. We also interviewed the surveyors. We observed survey visits to qualify the interviews and analysis. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analysed using an integrative approach. RESULTS: The surveyors combined documents, questioning of the professionals, and visual impressions of the clinic to assess compliance. They sought to de-dramatise the survey visit and to generate a natural conversation with attention to workflows. Trust in the professionals' statements was fundamental to the surveyors' approach, and they were confident in their ability to assess compliance. Their level of scrutiny was influenced by their observations and the quality of documents. The general practice professionals had generally sought to comply with the standards and to give an authentic portrait of the clinic. The few cases of misrepresention concerned standards that the professionals found too excessive. CONCLUSION: The validity of the survey visit as a method to assess compliance was highly dependent on the professionals' willingness to convey a realistic picture of their practice. Since they were generally willing to do so, the trust-based approach seemed suitable for identifying cases of non-compliance caused by insufficient understanding of the standards. However, it can be difficult for the surveyors to detect when the professionals engage in misrepresentation due to disagreements with the standards. Thus, when adopting a trust-based approach to the survey visit, it seems particularly important to ensure that the professionals view the standards as meaningful and manageable.

Understanding accreditation standards in general practice - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Accreditation is a widely adopted tool for quality control and quality improvement in health care, which has increasingly been employed for general practice. However, there is lack of knowledge of how accreditation is received and experienced by health professionals in general practice. This study explores how general practitioners (GPs) and their staff experienced the comprehensibility of accreditation standards and how they worked to increase their understanding of the standards. The study was conducted in Denmark where accreditation was mandatory in general practice from 2016 to 2018. METHODS: The study consists of qualitative interviews with general practitioners and staff from 11 general practices that were strategically sampled among practices set to receive their survey visit in 2017. Participants were interviewed twice; once during the preparation phase and once after the survey visit. GPs and staff were interviewed separately. The interviews were analysed inductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Understanding the requirements of the accreditation standards was a major challenge for the professionals when preparing for the accreditation survey visit. The participants attempted to increase their understanding of the standards in several ways including the use of regional support options and seeking out experts and colleagues. However, participants had mixed experiences with the various support options and many found the sense making work frustrating and time consuming. CONCLUSION: The results point to the importance of considering the level of specificity in accreditation standards and how to ensure an organisational set-up that can offer appropriate support to primary care clinics in terms of understanding what is required to meet the standards.

Experiences of accreditation impact in general practice - a qualitative study among general practitioners and their staff.

BACKGROUND: Accreditation is a widespread tool for quality management in health care. However, there is lack of research on the impact of accreditation, particularly in general practice. This study explores how general practitioners and their staff experienced the impact of a mandatory accreditation program in Denmark. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with general practitioners and staff from 11 clinics. The respondents were interviewed twice: during preparation and after the survey visit. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis, and all specific changes and other types of impact were extracted from the transcribed interview data from each clinic. RESULTS: The impact of accreditation varied markedly among the clinics as did the participants' overall assessments of accreditation. Concerning specific changes in behavior and physical infrastructure, some clinics had only implemented a few minor changes in response to accreditation, some had made a relatively moderate number of changes, and a few clinics had made relatively many changes including a few pronounced ones. Further, some participants experienced that accreditation had enhanced knowledge sharing or upgraded competencies, and increased job satisfaction. However, the workload related to accreditation was emphasized as a problem by a majority of the professionals and for a few, accreditation had influenced job satisfaction negatively. CONCLUSION: Accreditation may affect general practice clinics in very different ways. In spite of several examples of positive impact, the results suggest that it is difficult to design a mandatory accreditation program for general practice in which most professionals experience that the benefits of accreditation equal the resources used in the process.

Exploring drivers and challenges in implementation of health promotion in community mental health services: a qualitative multi-site case study using Normalization Process Theory.

BACKGROUND: There is an increased interest in improving the physical health of people with mental illness. Little is known about implementing health promotion interventions in adult mental health organisations where many users also have physical health problems. The literature suggests that contextual factors are important for implementation in community settings. This study focused on the change process and analysed the implementation of a structural health promotion intervention in community mental health organisations in different contexts in Denmark. METHODS: The study was based on a qualitative multiple-case design and included two municipal and two regional provider organisations. Data were various written sources and 13 semi-structured interviews with 22 key managers and frontline staff. The analysis was organised around the four main constructs of Normalization Process Theory: Coherence, Cognitive Participation, Collective Action, and Reflexive Monitoring. RESULTS: Coherence: Most respondents found the intervention to be meaningful in that the intervention fitted well into existing goals, practices and treatment approaches. Cognitive Participation: Management engagement varied across providers and low engagement impeded implementation. Engaging all staff was a general problem although some of the initial resistance was apparently overcome. Collective Action: Daily enactment depended on staff being attentive and flexible enough to manage the complex needs and varying capacities of users. Reflexive Monitoring: During implementation, staff evaluations of the progress and impact of the intervention were mostly informal and ad hoc and staff used these to make on-going adjustments to activities. Overall, characteristics of context common to all providers (work force and user groups) seemed to be more important for implementation than differences in the external political-administrative context. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of research, future studies should adopt a more bottom-up, grounded description of context and pay closer attention to the interplay between different dimensions of implementation. In terms of practice, future interventions need to better facilitate the translation of the initial sense of general meaning into daily practice by active local management support that occurs throughout the implementation process and that systematically connects the intervention to existing practices.

Influences of peer facilitation in general practice - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Practice facilitation is increasingly used to support guideline implementation and practice development in primary care and there is a need to explore how this implementation approach works in real-life settings. We focus on a facilitation intervention from the perspective of the visited practices to gain a more detailed understanding of how peer facilitation influenced practices and how they valued the facilitation. METHODS: The facilitation intervention was conducted in general practice in the Capital Region of Denmark with the purpose of supporting the implementation of chronic disease management programmes. We carried out a qualitative study, where we observed 30 facilitation visits in 13 practice settings and interviewed the visited practices after their first and last visits. We then performed a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Most of the respondents reported that facilitation visits had increased their knowledge and skills as well as their motivation and confidence to change. These positive influences were ascribed to a) the facilitation approach b) the credibility and know-how associated with the facilitators' being peers c) the recurring visits providing protected time and invoking a sense of commitment. Despite these positive influences, both the facilitation and the change process were impeded by several challenges, e.g. competing priorities, heavy workload, problems with information technology and in some cases inadequate facilitation. CONCLUSION: Practice facilitation is a multifaceted, interactive approach that may affect participants in several ways. It is important to attune the expectations of all the involved actors through elaborate discussions of needs, capabilities, wishes, and approaches, and to adapt facilitation interventions according to an analysis of influential contextual conditions and change opportunities.

Role enactment of facilitation in primary care - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Facilitation is a widely used implementation method in quality improvement. Reviews reveal a variety of understandings of facilitation and facilitator roles. Research suggests that facilitation interventions should be flexible and tailored to the needs and circumstances of the receiving organisations. The complexity of the facilitation field and diversity of potential facilitator roles fosters a need to investigate in detail how facilitation is enacted. Hence, the purpose of this study was to explore the enactment of external peer facilitation in general practice in order to create a stronger basis for discussing and refining facilitation as an implementation method. METHODS: The facilitation intervention under study was conducted in general practice in the Capital Region of Denmark in order to support an overall strategy for implementing chronic disease management programmes. We observed 30 facilitation visits in 13 practice settings and had interviews and focus groups with facilitators. We applied an explorative approach in data collection and analysis, and conducted an inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The facilitators mainly enacted four facilitator roles: teacher, super user, peer and process manager. Thus, apart from trying to keep the process structured and focused the facilitators were engaged in didactic presentations and hands-on learning as they tried to pass on factual information and experienced based knowledge as well as their own enthusiasm towards implementing practice changes. While occasional challenges were observed with enacting these roles, more importantly we found that a coaching based role which was also envisioned in the intervention design was only sparsely enacted meaning that the facilitators did not enable substantial internal group discussions during their facilitation visits. CONCLUSION: Facilitation is a complex phenomenon both conceptually and in practice. This study complements existing research by showing how facilitation can be enacted in various ways and by suggesting that some facilitator roles are more likely to be enacted than others, depending on the context and intervention design and the professional background of the facilitators. This complexity requires caution when comparing and evaluating facilitation studies and highlights a need for precision and clarity about goals, roles, and competences when designing, conducting, and reporting facilitation interventions.

Organising medication discontinuation: a qualitative study exploring the views of general practitioners toward discontinuing statins.

BACKGROUND: Discontinuing medications is a complex decision making process and an important medical practice. It is a tool in reducing polypharmacy, reducing health system expenditure and improving patient quality of life. Few studies have looked at how general practitioners (GPs) discontinue a medication, in agreement with the patients, from a professional perspective. Three research questions were examined in this study: when does medication discontinuation occur in general practice, how is discontinuing medication handled in the GP's practice and how do GPs make decisions about discontinuing medication? METHODS: Twenty four GPs were interviewed using a maximum variation sample strategy. Participant observations were done in three general practices, for one day each, totalling approximately 30 consultations. RESULTS: The results show that different discontinuation cues (related to the type of consultation, medical records and the patient) create situations of dissonance that can lead to the GP considering the option of discontinuation. We also show that there is a lot of ambiguity in situations of discontinuing and that some GPs trialled discontinuing as means of generating more information that could be used to deal with the ambiguity. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the practice of discontinuation should be conceptualised as a continually evaluative process and one that requires sustained reflection through a culture of systematically scheduled check-ups, routinely eliciting the patient's experience of taking drugs and trialling discontinuation. Some policy recommendations are offered including supporting GPs with lists or handbooks that directly address discontinuation and by developing more person centred clinical guidelines that discuss discontinuation more explicitly.

The challenges of boundary spanners in supporting inter-organizational collaboration in primary care--a qualitative study of general practitioners in a new role.

BACKGROUND: The visions of more integrated care have created new roles and accountabilities for organizations and professionals. Thus, professionals are increasingly expected to engage in boundary spanning activities in order to facilitate inter-organizational and inter-sectoral collaboration. However, this task can be difficult for individual actors and it is important to investigate the work and challenges of boundary spanners in various settings. This study explores the challenges related to a new boundary spanning role for general practitioners employed to facilitate collaboration between the municipalities and general practice. METHODS: The study is based on semi-structured interviews with ten general practitioners acting as municipal practice consultants in the Capital Region of Denmark. The transcribed interviews were analyzed in several steps organizing the material into a set of coherent and distinct categories covering the different types of challenges experienced by the informants. RESULTS: The main challenges of the general practitioners acting as boundary spanners were: 1) defining and negotiating the role in terms of tasks and competencies; 2) representing and mobilizing colleagues in general practice; 3) navigating in an unfamiliar organizational context. CONCLUSIONS: The results support previous studies in emphasizing the difficult and multifaceted character of the boundary spanning role. While some of these challenges are not easily dealt with due to their structural causes, organizations employing boundary spanners should take note of these challenges and support their boundary spanners with matching resources and competencies.

General practitioners uses and perceptions of voluntary electronic feedback on treatment outcomes - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is a strong focus on the diffusion and implementation of indicator-based technologies for assessing and improving the quality of care in general practice. The aim of this study was to explore how and for what purposes indicator-based feedback is used by the general practitioners (GPs) and how they perceive it to contribute to their work. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with nine GPs in two regions in Denmark. The main selection criterion was that the informants had experience with retrieving electronic feedback. The data generation was explorative and open-ended and the analysis took an iterative approach with continuous refinement of themes that emerged from the data. RESULTS: The study identified two main uses of feedback: i) Administration of a regular disease control schedule for patients with chronic disease and ii) Routine monitoring of outcomes for purposes of resource prioritisation and medication management. Both uses were deemed valuable by the GPs, but also as an additional extra to the clinical core task. All the GPs experienced the feedback to be of limited relevance to the most central and challenging aspects of clinical work understood as the care for individuals. This led to different reactions: Some GPs would use the feedback as a point of departure for broader deliberations about individual patient needs and treatment approaches. For others, the perceived limitations decreased their overall motivation to seek feedback. CONCLUSIONS: The study points to the importance of clarifying limitations as well as possibilities with respect to different aspects of clinical quality when introducing indicator-based technologies to practitioners. The results also emphasize that an indicator-based approach to quality improvement should not stand alone in general practice since some of the most central and challenging aspects of clinical work are not covered by this approach.

The effectiveness of a semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention to optimise chronic care management in general practice: a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Danish health care sector is reorganising based on disease management programmes designed to secure integrated and high quality chronic care across hospitals, general practitioners and municipalities. The disease management programmes assign a central role to general practice; and in the Capital Region of Denmark a facilitator-based intervention was undertaken to support the implementation of the programmes in general practice. The purpose of the study was to assess the effectiveness of this semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention. METHOD: The study was a stepped-wedge, randomised, controlled trial among general practices in the Capital Region of Denmark. The intervention group was offered three one-hour visits by a facilitator. The intervention was semi-tailored to the perceived needs as defined by each general practice, and the practices could choose from a list of possible topics. The control group was a delayed intervention group. The primary outcome was change in the number of annual chronic disease check-ups. Secondary outcomes were: changes in the number of annual check-ups for type 2 diabetes (DM2) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); changes in the number of spirometry tests, changes in the use of ICPC diagnosis coding and patient stratification; sign-up for a software program for patient overview; and reduction in number of practices with few annual chronic disease check-ups. RESULTS: We randomised 189 general practices: 96 practices were allocated to the intervention group and 93 to the delayed intervention group. For the primary outcome, 94 and 89 practices were analysed. Almost every outcome improved from baseline to follow-up in both allocation groups. At follow-up there was no difference between allocation groups for the primary outcome (p = 0.1639). However, some secondary outcomes favoured the intervention: a higher reported use of ICPC diagnosis coding for DM2 and COPD (p = 0.0050, p = 0.0243 respectively), stratification for COPD (p = 0.0185) and a faster initial sign-up rate for the software program. CONCLUSION: The mixed results from this study indicate that a semi-tailored facilitator-based intervention of relatively low intensity is unlikely to add substantially to the implementation of disease management programmes for DM2 and COPD in a context marked by important concurrent initiatives (including financial incentives and mandatory registry participation) aimed at moving all practices towards changes in chronic care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01297075.

General practitioners' experiences of providing somatic care for patients with severe mental illness: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients dealing with severe mental illnesses (SMI) often face suboptimal clinical outcomes and higher mortality rates due to a range of factors, including undetected physical health conditions. The provision of care for individuals with SMI is frequently disjointed, as they engage with diverse healthcare providers. Despite this fragmentation, primary care, particularly general practitioners (GPs), assumes a pivotal role in the care of SMI patients. Our study aimed to delve into the first-hand experiences of GPs in delivering somatic care to SMI patients, concentrating on the challenges they encounter and the strategies they employ to navigate these difficulties. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with fifteen GPs, utilizing a semi-structured interview guide, supplemented by ethnographic observations during clinical consultations in general practice. Through inductive coding, interview transcripts and observational field notes were systematically analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). The findings were then deliberated upon within the author group. RESULTS: GPs revealed that managing the chronic somatic care of SMI patients posed significant challenges. These challenges encompassed the multifaceted needs of patients, their behavior tied to symptoms, a lack of care continuity, and overarching time constraints. To tackle these challenges, the GPs had devised various strategies. However, all participants underscored the critical importance of having adequate time to properly prepare for, conduct, and follow up on consultations. CONCLUSION: The GPs' interactions with SMI patients brought numerous challenges, although treating these patients were concurrently acknowledged as vital and fulfilling. The findings suggest that increased allocated time in general practice consultations for patients with SMI is important to support the somatic treatment requirements of this patient group.

Challenges in reaching patients with severe mental illness for trials in general practice-a convergent mixed methods study based on the SOFIA pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe mental illness (SMI) die prematurely due to undetected and inadequate treatment of somatic illnesses. The SOFIA pilot study was initiated to mend this gap in health inequity. However, reaching patients with SMI for intervention research has previously proven difficult. This study aimed to investigate the recruitment of patients with SMI for the SOFIA pilot study in 2021. METHODS: We used a mixed-method convergent design. The qualitative material comprised 20 interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and staff, during patient recruitment. The quantitative data consisted of process data on baseline characteristics, GPs reported reasons for excluding a patient, reported reasons for patients declining participation, and registered data from a Danish population of patients with SMI. We used thematic analysis in the qualitative analysis and descriptive statistics for the quantitative analysis. Pillar integration was used for integrating the material. RESULTS: Our findings show that selection bias occurred in the pilot study. We describe four main themes based on the integrated analysis that highlights selection issues: (1) poor data quality and inconsistency in defining severity definitions troubled identification and verification, (2) protecting the patient and maintaining practice efficiency, (3) being familiar with the patient was important for a successful recruitment, and (4) in hindsight, the GPs questioned whether the target population was reached. CONCLUSIONS: In the light of theories of professions and street-level bureaucracy, we find that the main drivers of the patient selection bias occurring in the SOFIA pilot study were that 1) GPs and staff mended eligibility criteria to protect certain patients and/or to minimize workload and maintain efficiency in the practice 2) the data from the GP record systems and the digital assessment tool to assist recruitment was not optimal. Interventions targeting this patient group should carefully consider the recruitment strategy with a particular focus on professionals' discretionary practices and information technology pitfalls. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The pilot trial protocol was registered on the 5th of November 2020. The registration number is NCT04618250 .

Reasons for not reporting patient safety incidents in general practice: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the reasons for not reporting patient safety incidents in general practice. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews with general practitioners and members of the project group. SETTING: General practice clinics in the Region of Northern Jutland in Denmark. SUBJECTS: Twelve general practitioners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The experiences and reflections of the involved professionals with regard to system use and non-use. RESULTS: While most respondents were initially positive towards the idea of reporting and learning from patient safety incidents, they actually reported very few incidents. The major reasons for the low reporting rates are found to be a perceived lack of practical usefulness, issues of time and effort in a busy clinic with competing priorities, and considerations of appropriateness in relation to other professionals. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the visions of formal, comprehensive, and systematic reporting of (and learning from) patient safety incidents will be quite difficult to realize in general practice. Future studies should investigate how various ways of organizing incident reporting at the regional level influence local activities of reporting and learning in general practice.

Translating visions of transparency and quality development: the transformation of clinical databases in the Danish hospital field.

One of the most significant developments in the quest for quality, transparency, and accountability in healthcare is the construction and the implementation of indicator-based technologies. In Denmark, this development has been relatively pronounced, and based on an extensive document study supplemented by qualitative interviews, this paper articulates a policy history of the clinical databases for quality from the early 1990s to the present. First, the paper outlines how, in the early 1990s, the National Board of Health and representatives from the medical profession place the clinical databases on the quality agenda in healthcare. Second, the paper shows that, in spite of an initial alignment between governmental and professional interests, the establishment of national clinical databases for quality turns out to be a difficult enterprise. Third, the paper elaborates how the public authorities respond to the challenges by re-designing the governance framework for the databases. The transformations are characterized by increased centralization, standardization, specialization and regulative pressure. Finally, it is pointed out that although the course of events does constitute an increased institutionalization of the clinical databases, large variations exist and several databases have not yet realized the ambitions of transparency and quality improvement.

Introducing quality clusters in general practice - a qualitative study of the experiences of cluster coordinators.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the concept of clusters was introduced as a new model for data-driven quality improvement in general practice in Denmark. However, there is little research on the development and implementation of general practice clusters. The study explores how the cluster coordinators responsible for leading the clusters forward enacted and experienced their role during the early years of the clusters with attention to the challenges and enablers perceived in the process. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 25 cluster coordinators from clusters that had carried out at least two meetings on a specific professional topic. The coordinators represented clusters of varying sizes and different geographic locations. Key topics in the interview guide were the development and structure of the cluster, the role of the coordinator, obtainment of data for the meetings, the role of external support, the form and content of the meetings, the participation and engagement of the members. A thematic analysis - shaped by the original aims and categories of the study while also being open to emerging themes - was performed on the transcribed interview material. RESULTS: Important enablers in the process of developing the clusters included the positive engagement of the GPs, the support offered by regional quality units and a national quality organisation for general practice, and the funding provided by the formal cluster framework. Challenges initially included setting up the clusters administratively and translating the open cluster concept into a local, workable model; and later obtaining relevant data for the cluster meetings and facilitating peer discussions about the data. CONCLUSION: The coordinators generally experienced that the development of the clusters had progressed relatively fast with engagement from most of the participating GPs. Still, challenges with data obtainment, data analysis, and facilitation will have to be addressed ongoingly. Future research should investigate learning processes at the cluster meetings and how the clusters impact clinical practice and collaborative relations between general practice and other health care providers.

"My private theory is that it's all in the head": Understandings of chronic widespread pain among social workers from municipality job centers in Denmark.

People with chronic widespread pain (CWP) are often unfit for work, and consequently they are dependent on the municipality job center to receive social support and sickness benefits. The job center's case management is based on a social worker's assessment of the citizen's health condition. This qualitative study investigates social workers' understandings of CWP. Interviews were carried out with 12 social workers. The results showed that the participants predominantly experienced the citizens' illnesses as psychosocially mediated-referring to trauma, or a lack of meaning in the citizens' lives. Only a few participants mentioned possibilities for somatic explanations of CWP.

Reducing Antibiotic Prescriptions for Urinary Tract Infection in Nursing Homes Using a Complex Tailored Intervention Targeting Nursing Home Staff: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common reason for antibiotic prescription in nursing homes. Overprescription causes antibiotic-related harms in those who are treated and others residing within the nursing home. The diagnostic process in nursing homes is complicated with both challenging issues related to the elderly population and the nursing home setting. A physician rarely visits a nursing home for suspected UTI. Consequently, the knowledge of UTI and communication skills of staff influence the diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to describe a cluster randomized controlled trial with a tailored complex intervention for improving the knowledge of UTI and communication skills of nursing home staff in order to decrease the number of antibiotic prescriptions for UTI in nursing home residents, without changing hospitalization and mortality. METHODS: The study describes an open-label cluster randomized controlled trial with two parallel groups and a 1:1 allocation ratio. Twenty-two eligible nursing homes are sampled from the Capital Region of Denmark, corresponding to 1274 nursing home residents. The intervention group receives a dialogue tool, and all nursing home staff attend a workshop on UTI. The main outcomes of the study are the antibiotic prescription rate for UTI, all-cause hospitalization, all-cause mortality, and suspected UTI during the trial period. RESULTS: The trial ended in April 2019. Data have been collected and are being analyzed. We expect the results of the trial to be published in a peer-reviewed journal in the fall of 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The greatest strengths of this study are the randomized design, tailored development of the intervention, and access to medical records. The potential limitations are the hierarchy in the prescription process, Hawthorne effect, and biased access to data on signs and symptoms through a UTI diary. The results of this trial could offer a strategy to overcome some of the challenges of increased antibiotic resistance and could have implications in terms of how to handle cases of suspected UTI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03715062; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03715062. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/17710.