Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Interventions for Reducing Avoidable Hospital Readmission: Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.

BACKGROUND: Avoidable hospital readmission is a major problem among health systems. Although there are effective peri-discharge interventions for reducing avoidable hospital readmission, successful implementation is challenging. This systematic review of qualitative studies aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing peri-discharge interventions from providers' and service users' perspectives. METHODS: We searched four databases for potentially eligible qualitative studies from databases' inception to March 2020, and updated literature search for studies published between January 2020 to October 2021. Barriers and facilitators to implementing peri-discharge interventions were identified and mapped onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs. Inductive analysis of the CFIR constructs was performed to yield thematic areas that illustrated the relationship between various facilitators and barriers, generating practical insights to key implementation issues. RESULTS: Thirteen qualitative studies were included in this systematic review. Key issues were clustered in the CFIR constructs of Design Quality and Complexity of the intervention, strength of Network and Communication, being responsive to Patient Needs with sufficient Resource support, and External Incentives. The three thematic areas were rationality of the interventions, readiness and effort of multidisciplinary implementation teams, and influence of external stakeholders. Common barriers included (i) limited resources, (ii) poor communication among team members, (iii) incompatibility between the new intervention and existing work routine, (iv) complicated implementation process, (v) low practicality of supporting instruments, and (vi) lack of understanding about the content and effectiveness of the new interventions. Common facilitators were (i) information sharing via regular meetings on implementation issues, (ii) organizational culture that values quality and accountability, (iii) financial penalties for hospitals with high avoidable readmissions rates, (iv) external support offered via quality improvement programs and community resources, and (v) senior leadership support. CONCLUSION: This study synthesized commonly-presenting barriers and facilitators to implementing peri-discharge interventions among different healthcare organizations. Findings may inform development of implementation strategies in different health systems after appropriate tailoring, based on a consensus-based formative research process.

Barriers and Facilitators to Receiving the COVID-19 Vaccination and Development of Theoretically-Informed Implementation Strategies for the Public: Qualitative Study in Hong Kong.

OBJECTIVES: enhancing uptake of COVID-19 vaccines is an important tool for managing the pandemic. However, in Hong Kong, the COVID-19 vaccination rate in the general population was unsatisfactory during the early phase of the vaccination program. This two-part study aimed to (i) identify barriers and facilitators to receiving vaccinations, and (ii) develop theoretically-informed implementation strategies for promoting uptake. METHODS: in part 1, 45 Hong Kong residents who differed in their willingness to vaccinate (willing (n = 15), were unwilling (n = 15), and were hesitant (n = 15)), were interviewed individually in February 2021. They were invited to express their perceptions of receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was applied to guide the interviews and analyses. Behavioral diagnoses from these findings were then used to develop theoretically-informed implementation strategies in part 2, composed of behavior change techniques (BCTs) informed by the established BCT taxonomy. RESULTS: in part 1, the five main barriers were (i) concerns on severe and long-term side effects; (ii) low confidence in the safety and effectiveness due to concerns of their accelerated development; (iii) unclear information on logistical arrangements of the vaccination program; (iv) insufficient data on safety and effectiveness; and (v) perceived low protection ability conferred by the vaccines. The five main facilitators included (i) healthcare professionals' recommendations; (ii) news from TV, radio, and newspapers as main sources of trustworthy information; (iii) vaccine-related health education delivered by healthcare professionals; (iv) expectations of resuming to a normal social life; and (v) perceived benefits outweighing risks of mild and short-term side effects. CONCLUSIONS: seven implementation strategies were developed in part 2 based on the results above, namely (i) providing trustworthy vaccine-related information and scaling up the promotion; (ii) encouraging healthcare professionals to recommend vaccinations; (iii) giving incentives; (iv) using social influence approaches; (v) allowing a selection of COVID-19 vaccine brands; (vi) increasing accessibility for vaccinations; and (vii) emphasizing social responsibility.

Herbal medicine for functional dyspepsia: Network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomised trials.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Conventional treatments for functional dyspepsia (FD) are limited. Herbal medicine (HM) use is prevalent despite unclear comparative effectiveness among different formulae. AIM OF THE STUDY: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of HM formulae for FD against placebo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven international and Chinese databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on HM versus placebo. Risk of bias among RCTs was assessed using Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool 2. Data from RCTs were extracted for random-effect pairwise meta-analyses. NMAs were performed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of HM formulae. GRADE partially contextualised framework was adopted to facilitate NMA result interpretation. RESULTS: Twelve different HM formulae were identified from fifteen RCTs of mediocre quality. At 8-week follow-up, pairwise meta-analyses indicated that HM was superior to placebo in alleviating global symptoms (pooled risk difference (RD): 0.20; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.11-0.29), with effect size larger than the minimally clinically important difference of 0.20 RD. Sensitivity analysis showed no significant impact on results attributable to risk of bias. NMAs demonstrated that Xiao Yao Pill and Modified Ban Xia Xie Xin Decoction probably have a large beneficial effect on alleviating global symptoms (RD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.03-0.99) and postprandial fullness (standardised mean difference: -0.93; 95% credible interval: -1.61 to -0.06), respectively. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Xiao Yao Pill and Modified Ban Xia Xie Xin Decoction may be considered as an alternative among patients unresponsive to conventional treatments. The comparative effectiveness of these two formulae should be evaluated in future trials.

Effectiveness of nurse-led peri-discharge interventions for reducing 30-day hospital readmissions: Network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Existing systematic reviews have compared the effectiveness of nurse-led peri-discharge interventions comprising different components with usual care on reducing all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions. However, conflicting results were reported. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different nurse-led peri-discharge interventions, compared with usual care, for reducing all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions. DESIGN: Network meta-analysis. METHODS: A total of five international databases were searched for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. Additional searches for most updated randomized controlled trials published between 2014 to 2019 were conducted. Data from included randomized controlled trials were extracted for random-effect pairwise meta-analyses. Pooled risk ratios with 95% confidence interval were used to quantify impact of nurse-led peri-discharge interventions on all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions. Network meta-analysis was used to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different interventions. RESULTS: From two systematic reviews and additional randomized controlled trial searches, 12 eligible randomized controlled trials (n=150,840) assessing 15 different nurse-led peri-discharge interventions were included. For reducing all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions, pairwise meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference between nurse-led peri-discharge interventions and usual care (pooled risk ratios = 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.71-1.04, moderate quality of evidence). Network meta-analysis indicated no significant difference across different interventions despite variation in complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicated that nurse-led peri-discharge interventions were not significantly different from usual care for reducing all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions. Simpler nurse-led peri-discharge interventions are on par with more complex interventions in terms of effectiveness. Benefits of nurse-led peri-discharge interventions may vary across health system context. Therefore, careful consideration is required prior to implementation. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The protocol for this study has been registered in PROSPERO (Registration No. CRD42020186938). Tweetable abstract: This study suggested that nurse-led peri-discharge interventions do not differ from usual care for reducing all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions.