Nurse-Initiated Acute Stroke Care in Emergency Departments: The Triage, Treatment, and Transfer Implementation Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background and Purpose- We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention to improve triage, treatment, and transfer for patients with acute stroke admitted to the emergency department (ED). Methods- A pragmatic, blinded, multicenter, parallel group, cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted between July 2013 and September 2016 in 26 Australian EDs with stroke units and tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator) protocols. Hospitals, stratified by state and tPA volume, were randomized 1:1 to intervention or usual care by an independent statistician. Eligible ED patients had acute stroke <48 hours from symptom onset and were admitted to the stroke unit via ED. Our nurse-initiated T3 intervention targeted (1) Triage to Australasian Triage Scale category 1 or 2; (2) Treatment: tPA eligibility screening and appropriate administration; clinical protocols for managing fever, hyperglycemia, and swallowing; (3) prompt (<4 hours) stroke unit Transfer. It was implemented using (1) workshops to identify barriers and solutions; (2) face-to-face, online, and written education; (3) national and local clinical opinion leaders; and (4) email, telephone, and site visit follow-up. Outcomes were assessed at the patient level. Primary outcome: 90-day death or dependency (modified Rankin Scale score of ≥2); secondary outcomes: functional dependency (Barthel Index ≥95), health status (Short Form [36] Health Survey), and ED quality of care (Australasian Triage Scale; monitoring and management of tPA, fever, hyperglycemia, swallowing; prompt transfer). Intention-to-treat analysis adjusted for preintervention outcomes and ED clustering. Patients, outcome assessors, and statisticians were masked to group allocation. Results- Twenty-six EDs (13 intervention and 13 control) recruited 2242 patients (645 preintervention and 1597 postintervention). There were no statistically significant differences at follow-up for 90-day modified Rankin Scale (intervention: n=400 [53.5%]; control n=266 [48.7%]; P=0.24) or secondary outcomes. Conclusions- This evidence-based, theory-informed implementation trial, previously effective in stroke units, did not change patient outcomes or clinician behavior in the complex ED environment. Implementation trials are warranted to evaluate alternative approaches for improving ED stroke care. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au. Unique identifier: ACTRN12614000939695.

Impact of stated barriers on proposed warfarin prescription for atrial fibrillation: a survey of Canadian physicians.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cardiac arrhythmia, and leading cause of ischemic stroke. Despite proven effectiveness, warfarin remains an under-used treatment in atrial fibrillation patients. We sought to study, across three physician specialties, a range of factors that have been argued to have a disproportionate effect on treatment decisions. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of Canadian Family Doctors (FD: n = 500), Geriatricians (G: n = 149), and Internal Medicine specialists (IMS: n = 500). Of these, 1032 physicians were contactable, and 335 completed and usable responses were received. Survey questions and clinical vignettes asked about the frequency with which they see patients with atrial fibrillation, treatment practices, and barriers to the prescription of anticoagulants. RESULTS: Stated prescribing practices did not significantly differ between physician groups. Falls risk, bleeding risk and poor patient adherence were all highly cited barriers to prescribing warfarin. Fewer geriatricians indicated that history of patient falls would be a reason for not treating with warfarin (G: 47%; FD: 71%; IMS: 72%), and significantly fewer changed reported practice in the presence of falls risk (χ (2) (6) = 45.446, p < 0.01). Experience of a patient having a stroke whilst not on warfarin had a significant impact on vignette decisions; physicians who had had patients who experienced a stroke were more likely to prescribe warfarin (χ (2) (3) =10.7, p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to treatment of atrial fibrillation with warfarin affect physician specialties to different extents. Prior experience of a patient suffering a stroke when not prescribed warfarin is positively associated with intention to prescribe warfarin, even in the presence of falls risk.

The big six: key principles for effective use of Behavior substitution in interventions to de-implement low-value care.

ABSTRACT: Healthcare professionals provide care to help patients; however, sometimes that care is of low value - at best ineffective and at worst harmful. To address this, recent frameworks provide guidance for developing and investigating de-implementation interventions; yet little attention has been devoted to identifying what strategies are most effective for de-implementation. In this paper, we discuss Behavior substitution, a strategy whereby an unwanted behavior is replaced with a wanted behavior, thereby making it hypothetically easier to reduce or stop the unwanted behavior. We discuss why Behavior substitution may be a useful de-implementation strategy, and why it may not be suitable for all circumstances. On the basis of the body of knowledge in behavioral science, we propose a list of principles to consider when selecting a substitute behavior for a de-implementation intervention. Applying these principles should increase the likelihood that this technique will be effective in reducing low-value care.

A multiple-behaviour investigation of goal prioritisation in physicians receiving audit and feedback to address high-risk prescribing in nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: As part of their professional role, healthcare providers enact multiple competing goal-directed behaviours in time-constrained environments. Better understanding healthcare providers' motivation to engage in the pursuit of particular goals may help inform the development of implementation interventions. We investigated healthcare providers' pursuit of multiple goals as part of a trial evaluating the effectiveness of an audit and feedback intervention in supporting appropriate adjustment of high-risk medication prescribing by physicians working in nursing homes. Our objectives were to determine whether goal priority and constructs from Social Cognitive Theory (self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and descriptive norms) predicted intention to adjust prescribing of multiple high-risk medications and to investigate how physicians in nursing homes prioritise their goals related to high-risk medication prescribing. METHODS: Physicians in Ontario, Canada, who signed up for and accessed the audit and feedback report were invited to complete a questionnaire assessing goal priority, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, descriptive norms, and intention in relation to the three targeted behaviours (adjusting prescribing of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and antidepressants) and a control behaviour (adjusting statin prescribing). We conducted multiple linear regression analyses to identify predictors of intention. We also conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews to investigate how physicians in nursing homes prioritise their goals in relation to appropriately adjusting prescribing of the medications included in the report: analysis was informed by the framework analysis method. RESULTS: Thirty-three of 89 (37%) physicians completed the questionnaire. Goal priority was the only significant predictor of intention for each medication type; the greater a priority it was for physicians to appropriately adjust their prescribing, the stronger was their intention to do so. Across five interviews, physicians reported prioritising adjustment of antipsychotic prescribing specifically. This was influenced by negative media coverage of antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes, the provincial government's mandate to address antipsychotic prescribing, and by the deprescribing initiatives or best practice routines in place in their nursing homes. CONCLUSIONS: Goal priority predicted nursing home physicians' intention to adjust prescribing. Targeting goal priority through implementation interventions therefore has the potential to influence behaviour via increased motivation. Implementation intervention developers should consider the external factors that may drive physicians' prioritization.

Testing Behavior Change Techniques to Encourage Primary Care Physicians to Access Cancer Screening Audit and Feedback Reports: Protocol for a Factorial Randomized Experiment of Email Content.

BACKGROUND: Cancer Care Ontario's Screening Activity Report (SAR) is an online audit and feedback tool designed to help primary care physicians in Ontario, Canada, identify patients who are overdue for cancer screening or have abnormal results requiring follow-up. Use of the SAR is associated with increased screening rates. To encourage SAR use, Cancer Care Ontario sends monthly emails to registered primary care physicians announcing that updated data are available. However, analytics reveal that 50% of email recipients do not open the email and less than 7% click the embedded link to log in to their report. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the study is to determine whether rewritten emails result in increased log-ins. This manuscript describes how different user- and theory-informed messages intended to improve the impact of the monthly emails will be experimentally tested and how a process evaluation will explore why and how any effects observed were (or were not) achieved. METHODS: A user-centered approach was used to rewrite the content of the monthly email, including messages operationalizing 3 behavior change techniques: anticipated regret, material incentive (behavior), and problem solving. A pragmatic, 2x2x2 factorial experiment within a multiphase optimization strategy will test the redesigned emails with an embedded qualitative process evaluation to understand how and why the emails may or may not have worked. Trial outcomes will be ascertained using routinely collected administrative data. Physicians will be recruited for semistructured interviews using convenience and snowball sampling. RESULTS: As of April 2017, 5576 primary care physicians across the province of Ontario, Canada, had voluntarily registered for the SAR, and in so doing, signed up to receive the monthly email updates. From May to August 2017 participants received the redesigned monthly emails with content specific to their allocated experimental condition prompting use of the SAR. We have not yet begun analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This study will inform how to communicate effectively with primary care providers by email and identify which behavior change techniques tested are most effective at encouraging engagement with an audit and feedback report. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03124316; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03124316 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6w2MqDWGu).

Improving the care for people with acute low-back pain by allied health professionals (the ALIGN trial): A cluster randomised trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Variability between clinical practice guideline recommendations and actual clinical practice exists in many areas of health care. A 2004 systematic review examining the effectiveness of guideline implementation interventions concluded there was a lack of evidence to support decisions about effective interventions to promote the uptake of guidelines. Further, the review recommended the use of theory in the development of implementation interventions. A clinical practice guideline for the management of acute low-back pain has been developed in Australia (2003). Acute low-back pain is a common condition, has a high burden, and there is some indication of an evidence-practice gap in the allied health setting. This provides an opportunity to develop and test a theory-based implementation intervention which, if effective, may provide benefits for patients with this condition. AIMS: This study aims to estimate the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention to increase allied health practitioners' (physiotherapists and chiropractors in Victoria, Australia) compliance with a clinical practice guideline for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP), compared with providing practitioners with a printed copy of the guideline. Specifically, our primary objectives are to establish if the intervention is effective in reducing the percentage of acute non-specific LBP patients who are either referred for or receive an x-ray, and improving mean level of disability for patients three months post-onset of acute LBP. METHODS: The design of the study is a cluster randomised trial. Restricted randomisation was used to randomise 210 practices (clusters) to an intervention or control group. Practitioners in the control group received a printed copy of the guideline. Practitioners in the intervention group received a theory-based intervention developed to address prospectively identified barriers to practitioner compliance with the guideline. The intervention primarily consisted of an educational symposium. Patients aged 18 years or older who visit a participating practitioner for acute non-specific LBP of less than three months duration over a two-week data collection period, three months post the intervention symposia, are eligible for inclusion. Sample size calculations are based on recruiting between 15 to 40 patients per practice. Outcome assessors will be blinded to group allocation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609001022257 (date registered 25th November 2009).