Patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a medication review in primary care: a qualitative thematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although polypharmacy can cause adverse health outcomes, patients often know little about their medication. A regularly conducted medication review (MR) can help provide an overview of a patient's medication, and benefit patients by enhancing their knowledge of their drugs. As little is known about patient attitudes towards MRs in primary care, the objective of this study was to gain insight into patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of an MR. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with a convenience sample of 31 patients (age ≥ 60 years, ≥3 chronic diseases, taking ≥5 drugs/d); in Hesse, Germany, in February 2016. We conducted two focus groups and, in order to ensure the participation of elderly patients with reduced mobility, 16 telephone interviews. Both relied on a semi-structured interview guide dealing with the following subjects: patients' experience of polypharmacy, general design of MRs, potential barriers and facilitators to implementation etc. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed by two researchers using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients' average age was 74 years (range 62-88 years). We identified barriers and facilitators for four main topics regarding the implementation of MRs in primary care: patient participation, GP-led MRs, pharmacist-led MRs, and the involvement of healthcare assistants in MRs. Barriers to patient participation concerned patient autonomy, while facilitators involved patient awareness of medication-related problems. Barriers to GP-led MRs concerned GP's lack of resources while facilitators related to the trusting relationship between patient and GP. Pharmacist-led MRs might be hindered by a lack of patients' confidence in pharmacists' expertise, but facilitated by pharmacies' digital records of the patients' medications. Regarding the involvement of healthcare assistants in MRs, a potential barrier was patients' uncertainty regarding the extent of their training. Patients could, however, imagine GPs delegating some aspects of MRs to them. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that patients regard MRs as beneficial and expect indications for their medicines to be checked, and possible interactions to be identified. To foster the implementation of MRs in primary care, it is important to consider barriers and facilitators to the four identified topics.

Applicability and Validity of Second Victim Assessment Instruments among General Practitioners and Healthcare Assistants (SEVID-IX Study).

BACKGROUND: The second victim phenomenon and moral injury are acknowledged entities of psychological harm for healthcare providers. Both pose risks to patients, healthcare workers, and medical institutions, leading to further adverse events, economic burden, and dysfunctionality. Preceding studies in Germany and Austria showed a prevalence of second victim phenomena exceeding 53 percent among physicians, nurses, emergency physicians, and pediatricians. Using two German instruments for assessing moral injury and second victim phenomena, this study aimed to evaluate their feasibility for general practitioners and healthcare assistants. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide anonymous online survey in Germany among general practitioners and healthcare assistants utilizing the SeViD (Second Victims in Deutschland) questionnaire, the German version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool Revised Version (G-SVESTR), and the German version of the Moral Injury Symptom and Support Scale for Health Professionals (G-MISS-HP). RESULTS: Out of 108 participants, 67 completed the survey. In G-SVESTR, the collegial support items exhibited lower internal consistency than in prior studies, while all other scales showed good-quality properties. Personality traits, especially neuroticism, negatively correlated to age, seem to play a significant role in symptom count and warrant further evaluation. Multiple linear regression indicated that neuroticism, agreeableness, G-SVESTR, and G-MISS-HP were significant predictors of symptom count. Furthermore, moral injury partially mediated the relationship between second victim experience and symptom count. DISCUSSION: The results demonstrate the feasible use of the questionnaires, except for collegial support. With respect to selection bias and the cross-sectional design of the study, moral injury may be subsequent to the second victim phenomenon, strongly influencing symptom count in retrospect. This aspect should be thoroughly evaluated in future studies.

[General practitioners' perspectives on the perceived effectiveness of the disease management programs for type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease: Results of a focus group study]. / Die wahrgenommene Effektivität der Disease Management Programme für Diabetes mellitus Typ 2 und Koronare Herzkrankheit aus Sicht von Hausärzt*innen ­ Ergebnisse einer Fokusgruppenstudie.

BACKGROUND: The majority of patients in disease management programs (DMPs) for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and coronary heart disease (CHD) in Germany are enrolled by their general practitioner (GP). The aim of this study was, in the context of upcoming DMP expansions, to elicit GPs' current experiences and opinions regarding the perceived effectiveness and acceptance of the DMPs T2DM and CHD, as well as to determine beneficial and hindering aspects of the implementation of these programs from a GP's perspective. METHODS: In August and September 2020, 20 GPs of teaching practices of the University Hospital Cologne with experiences in DMPs were interviewed in semi-structured focus group discussions. Their expectations, attitudes and opinions regarding the DMPs T2DM and CHD were evaluated and analyzed according to the content-structuring qualitative content analysis by Kuckartz. RESULTS: The DMP T2DM was rated as generally positive by the respondents due to the structured treatment including regular foot and eye examinations, close patient contacts and perceptions of improved health outcomes. The DMP CHD was rated more negatively by the respondents because of a high and partly unnecessary documentation workload and limited therapeutic freedom, leading to a perceived ineffectiveness for patients' health outcomes. Thus, there was a discrepancy in the perceived effectiveness of the examined DMPs, causing a lower acceptance of the DMP CHD. Therefore, some of the respondents tended to enroll fewer patients into the DMP CHD or to drop out of the DMP CHD. DISCUSSION: In order to increase the acceptance and sustainability of DMPs some elements of the DMP CHD as well as the remuneration and the documentation need to be reconsidered. Additionally, future studies on the acceptance of DMPs should differentiate between different DMPs in order to generate valid results.

Blackbox error management: how do practices deal with critical incidents in everyday practice? A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Error management plays a key role in patient safety. It is a systematic approach aimed at identifying and learning from critical incidents by reporting, documenting and analyzing them. Almost nothing is known about the incidents physicians in outpatient care consider to be critical and how they deal with them. We carried out an interview study to explore outpatient physicians' views on error management, discover what they regard as critical incidents, and find out how error management is put into practice in ambulatory care. METHODS: We conducted 72 semi-structured interviews with physicians from ambulatory practices. We asked participants what they considered to be a critical incident, how they reacted following an incident, how they discussed incidents with their coworkers, and whether they used critical incident reporting systems. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Interviewed physicians defined the term "critical incident" differently. Most participants reported that they recorded information on incidents and discussed them in their teams. Several physicians reported taking a 'pay better attention next time-approach' to the analysis of incidents. Systematic error management involving incident documentation, analysis, preventive measure development, and follow-up, was the exception. CONCLUSIONS: To promote error management, medical training should include teaching on the topic, so that medical professionals can learn about critical incidents and how to deal with them in an open and structured manner. This would help establish the culture of safety that has long been called for internationally.

Complex implementation mechanisms in primary care: do physicians' beliefs about the effectiveness of innovation play a mediating role? Applying a realist inquiry and structural equation modeling approach in a formative evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of digital health technologies can improve the quality of care for polypharmacy patients, if the underlying complex implementation mechanisms are better understood. Context effects play a critical role in relation to implementation mechanisms. In primary care research, evidence on the effects of context in the adoption of digital innovation for polypharmacy management is lacking. STUDY AIM: This study aims to identify contextual factors relevant to physician behavior and how they might mediate the adoption process. METHODS: The physicians who participated in this formative evaluation study (n = 218) were part of the intervention group in a cluster-randomized controlled trial (AdAM). The intervention group implemented a digital innovation for clinical decision making in polypharmacy. A three-step methodological approach was used: (1) a realist inquiry approach, which involves the description of a context-mechanism-outcome configuration for the primary care setting; (2) a belief elicitation approach, which involves qualitative content analysis and the development of a quantitative latent contextualized scale; and (3) a mediation analysis using structural equation modeling (SEM) based on quantitative survey data from physicians to assess the mediating role of the contextualized scale (n = 179). RESULTS: The key dimensions of a (1) context-mechanism-outcome model were mapped and refined. A (2) latent construct of the physicians' innovation beliefs related to the effectiveness of polypharmacy management practices was identified. Innovation beliefs play a (3) mediating role between the organizational readiness to implement change (p < 0.01) and the desired behavioral intent of physicians to adopt digital innovation (p < 0.01; R2 = 0.645). Our contextualized model estimated significant mediation, with a relative size of 38% for the mediation effect. Overall, the model demonstrated good fit indices (CFI = 0.985, RMSEA = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Physician adoption is directly affected by the readiness of primary care organizations for the implementation of change. In addition, the mediation analysis revealed that this relationship is indirectly influenced by primary care physicians' beliefs regarding the effectiveness of digital innovation. Both individual physician beliefs and practice organizational capacity could be equally prioritized in developing implementation strategies. The methodological approach used is suitable for the evaluation of complex implementation mechanisms. It has been proven to be an advantageous approach for formative evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03430336 . First registration: 12/02/2018. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Everyday Lives of Middle-Aged Persons with Multimorbidity: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review.

The healthcare burden of patients with multimorbidity may negatively affect their family lives, leisure time and professional activities. This mixed methods systematic review synthesizes studies to assess how multimorbidity affects the everyday lives of middle-aged persons, and identifies skills and resources that may help them overcome that burden. Two independent reviewers screened title/abstracts/full texts in seven databases, extracted data and used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) to assess risk of bias (RoB). We synthesized findings from 44 studies (49,519 patients) narratively and, where possible, quantitatively. Over half the studies provided insufficient information to assess representativeness or response bias. Two studies assessed global functioning, 15 examined physical functioning, 18 psychosocial functioning and 28 work functioning. Nineteen studies explored skills and resources that help people cope with multimorbidity. Middle-aged persons with multimorbidity have greater impairment in global, physical and psychosocial functioning, as well as lower employment rates and work productivity, than those without. Certain skills and resources help them cope with their everyday lives. To provide holistic and dynamic health care plans that meet the needs of middle-aged persons, health professionals need greater understanding of the experience of coping with multimorbidity and the associated healthcare burden.

From sensitization to adoption? A qualitative study of the implementation of a digitally supported intervention for clinical decision making in polypharmacy.

OBJECTIVE: Formative evaluation of the implementation process for a digitally supported intervention in polypharmacy in Germany. Qualitative research was conducted within a cluster randomized controlled trial (C-RCT). It focused on understanding how the intervention influences behavior-related outcomes in the prescription and medication review process. METHODS/SETTING: Twenty-seven general practitioners (GPs) were included in the study in the two groups of the C-RCT, the intervention, and the wait list control group. Behavior-related outcomes were investigated using three-step data analysis (content analytic approach, documentary method, and design of a model of implementation pathways). RESULTS: Content analysis showed that physicians were more intensely aware of polypharmacy-related risks, described positive learning effects of the digital technology on their prescribing behavior, and perceived a change in communication with patients and pharmacists. Conversely, they felt uncertain about their own responsibility when prescribing. Three main dimensions were discovered which influenced adoption behavior: (1) the physicians' interpretation of the relevance of pharmaceutical knowledge provided by the intervention in changing decision-making situations in polypharmacy; (2) their medical code of ethics for clinical decision making in the context of progressing digitalization; and (3) their concepts of evidence-based medicine on the basis of professional experiences with polypharmacy in primary care settings. In our sample, both simple and complex pathways from sensitization to adoption were observed. The resulting model on adoption behavior includes a paradigmatic description of different pathways and a visualization of different observed levels and applied methodological approaches. We assumed that the GP habitus can weaken or strengthen interventional effects towards intervention uptake. This formative evaluation strategy is beneficial for the identification of behavior-related implementation barriers and facilitators. CONCLUSION: Our analyses of the adoption behavior of a digitally supported intervention in polypharmacy revealed both simple and complex pathways from awareness to adoption, which may impact the implementation of the intervention and therefore, its effectiveness. Future consideration of adoption behavior in the planning and evaluation of digitally supported interventions may enhance uptake and support the interpretation of effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03430336 , 12 February 2018.

Improving critical incident reporting in primary care through education and involvement.

BACKGROUND: Critical incident reporting systems (CIRS) can be an important tool for the identification of organisational safety needs and thus to improve patient safety. In German primary care, CIRS use is obligatory but remains rare. Studies on CIRS implementation in primary care are lacking, but those from secondary care recommend involving management personnel. OBJECTIVE: This project aimed to increase CIRS use in 69 practices belonging to a local practice network. METHODS: The intervention consisted of the provision of a web-based CIRS, accompanying measures to train practice teams in error management and CIRS, and the involvement of the network's management. Three measurements were used: (1) number of incident reports and user access rates to the web-based CIRS were recorded, (2) staff were given a questionnaire addressing incident reporting, error management and safety climate and (3) qualitative reflection conferences were held with network management. RESULTS: Over 20 months, 17 critical incidents were reported to the web-based CIRS. The number of staff intending to report the next incident online decreased from 42% to 20% of participants. In contrast, the number of practices using an offline CIRS (eg, incident book) increased from 23% to 49% of practices. Practices also began proactively approaching network management for help with incidents. After project completion, participants scored higher in the patient safety climate factor 'perception of causes of errors'. For many practices, the project provided the first contact with structured error management. CONCLUSION: Specific measures to improve the use of CIRS in primary care should focus on network management and practice owners. Practices need basic training on safety culture and error management. Continuing, practices should implement an offline CIRS, before they can profit from the exchange of reports via web-based CIRS. It is crucial that practices receive feedback on incidents, and trained network management personnel can provide such support.