Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros




Base de datos
Asunto de la revista
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0302815, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38771818

RESUMEN

The Strengthening Care for Children (SC4C) is a general practitioner (GP)-paediatrician integrated model of care that consists of co-consulting sessions and case discussions in the general practice setting, with email and telephone support provided by paediatricians to GPs during weekdays. This model was implemented in 21 general practices in Australia (11 Victoria and 10 New South Wales). Our study aimed to identify the factors moderating the implementation of SC4C from the perspectives of GPs, general practice personnel, paediatricians and families. We conducted a qualitative study as part of the mixed-methods implementation evaluation of the SC4C trial. We collected data through virtual and in-person focus groups at the general practices and phone, virtual and in-person interviews. Data was analysed using an iterative hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis. Twenty-one focus groups and thirty-seven interviews were conducted. Overall, participants found SC4C acceptable and suitable for general practices, with GPs willing to learn and expand their paediatric care role. GPs cited improved confidence and knowledge due to the model. Paediatricians reported an enhanced understanding of the general practice context and the strain under which GPs work. GPs and paediatricians reported that this model allowed them to build trust-based relationships with a common goal of improving care for children. Additionally, they felt some aspects, including the lack of remuneration and the work and effort required to deliver the model, need to be considered for the long-term success of the model. Families expressed their satisfaction with the shared knowledge and quality of care jointly delivered by GPs and paediatricians and highlighted that this model of care provides easy access to specialty services without out-of-pocket costs. Future research should focus on finding strategies to ensure the long-term Implementation of this model of care with a particular focus on the individual stressors in general practices.


Asunto(s)
Medicina General , Médicos Generales , Humanos , Médicos Generales/psicología , Medicina General/organización & administración , Niño , Pediatras/psicología , Masculino , Femenino , Australia , Grupos Focales , Investigación Cualitativa , Pediatría , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud
2.
BMJ Open ; 12(9): e063450, 2022 09 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36171022

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Implementation evaluations provide insight into how interventions are delivered across varying contexts and why interventions work in some contexts and not in others. This manuscript outlines a detailed protocol of an implementation evaluation embedded in a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial of a model of care, Strengthening Care for Children (SC4C), that integrates paediatric care in general practice. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the pragmatic methods that will be used to capture implementation evaluation process and outcome data within this trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our implementation evaluation will use a mixed methods design, with data collected in the intervention arm of the SC4C trial guided by a logic model developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Proctor and colleague's taxonomy of implementation outcomes. Data collection will be via questionnaires and semistructured interviews with general practitioners, paediatricians, general practice administrative staff and children and families. Each of the 21 general practices recruited into the study will be described in terms of staffing, patient throughput and location, in addition to the nuanced inner and outer contexts, use of the intervention and its acceptability. We will quantify implementation effectiveness in each general practice clinic using the CFIR validated scoring system. Importantly, we have embedded data collection post intervention to enable assessment of the sustainable adoption of the intervention. An inductive approach to the analysis of qualitative data will identify additional emerging themes that may not be covered by the formal frameworks underpinning our analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the Royal Children's Hospital Ethics Committee in August 2020 (HREC: 65955). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 12620001299998 on 1 December 2020.


Asunto(s)
Medicina General , Médicos Generales , Niño , Humanos , Atención Primaria de Salud , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
3.
BMJ Open ; 12(9): e063449, 2022 09 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36171040

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Australia's current healthcare system for children is neither sustainable nor equitable. As children (0-4 years) comprise the largest proportion of all primary care-type emergency department presentations, general practitioners (GPs) report feeling undervalued as an integral member of a child's care, and lacking in opportunities for support and training in paediatric conditions. This Strengthening Care for Children (SC4C) randomised trial aims to evaluate a novel, integrated GP-paediatrician model of care, that, if effective, will improve GP quality of care, reduce burden to hospital services and ensure children receive the right care, at the right time, closer to home. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: SC4C is a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 22 general practice clinics in Victoria and New South Wales, Australia. General practice clinics will provide control period data before being exposed to the 12-month intervention which will be rolled out sequentially each month (one clinic per state) until all 22 clinics receive the intervention. The intervention comprises weekly GP-paediatrician co-consultation sessions; monthly case discussions; and phone and email paediatrician support, focusing on common paediatric conditions. The primary outcome of the trial is to assess the impact of the intervention as measured by the proportion of children's (0-<18 years) GP appointments that result in a hospital referral, compared with the control period. Secondary outcomes include GP quality of care; GP experience and confidence in providing paediatric care; family trust in and preference for GP care; and the sustainability of the intervention. An implementation evaluation will assess the model to inform acceptability, adaptability, scalability and sustainability, while a health economic evaluation will measure the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human research ethics committee (HREC) approval was granted by The Royal Children's Hospital Ethics Committee in August 2020 (Project ID: 65955) and site-specific HRECs. The investigators (including Primary Health Network partners) will communicate trial results to stakeholders and participating GPs and general practice clinics via presentations and publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 12620001299998.


Asunto(s)
Médicos Generales , Niño , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Pediatras , Atención Primaria de Salud , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Victoria
4.
BMJ ; 350: h68, 2015 Jan 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25646809

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether behavioural strategies designed to improve children's sleep problems could also improve the symptoms, behaviour, daily functioning, and working memory of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the mental health of their parents. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 21 general paediatric practices in Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 244 children aged 5-12 years with ADHD attending the practices between 2010 and 2012. INTERVENTION: Sleep hygiene practices and standardised behavioural strategies delivered by trained psychologists or trainee paediatricians during two fortnightly consultations and a follow-up telephone call. Children in the control group received usual clinical care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: At three and six months after randomisation: severity of ADHD symptoms (parent and teacher ADHD rating scale IV-primary outcome), sleep problems (parent reported severity, children's sleep habits questionnaire, actigraphy), behaviour (strengths and difficulties questionnaire), quality of life (pediatric quality of life inventory 4.0), daily functioning (daily parent rating of evening and morning behavior), working memory (working memory test battery for children, six months only), and parent mental health (depression anxiety stress scales). RESULTS: Intervention compared with control families reported a greater decrease in ADHD symptoms at three and six months (adjusted mean difference for change in symptom severity -2.9, 95% confidence interval -5.5 to -0.3, P=0.03, effect size -0.3, and -3.7, -6.1 to -1.2, P=0.004, effect size -0.4, respectively). Compared with control children, intervention children had fewer moderate-severe sleep problems at three months (56% v 30%; adjusted odds ratio 0.30, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.59; P<0.001) and six months (46% v 34%; 0.58, 0.32 to 1.0; P=0.07). At three months this equated to a reduction in absolute risk of 25.7% (95% confidence interval 14.1% to 37.3%) and an estimated number needed to treat of 3.9. At six months the number needed to treat was 7.8. Approximately a half to one third of the beneficial effect of the intervention on ADHD symptoms was mediated through improved sleep, at three and six months, respectively. Intervention families reported greater improvements in all other child and family outcomes except parental mental health. Teachers reported improved behaviour of the children at three and six months. Working memory (backwards digit recall) was higher in the intervention children compared with control children at six months. Daily sleep duration measured by actigraphy tended to be higher in the intervention children at three months (mean difference 10.9 minutes, 95% confidence interval -19.0 to 40.8 minutes, effect size 0.2) and six months (9.9 minutes, -16.3 to 36.1 minutes, effect size 0.3); however, this measure was only completed by a subset of children (n=54 at three months and n=37 at six months). CONCLUSIONS: A brief behavioural sleep intervention modestly improves the severity of ADHD symptoms in a community sample of children with ADHD, most of whom were taking stimulant medications. The intervention also improved the children's sleep, behaviour, quality of life, and functioning, with most benefits sustained to six months post-intervention. The intervention may be suitable for use in primary and secondary care.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68819261.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/terapia , Terapia Conductista/métodos , Padres/psicología , Trastornos del Sueño-Vigilia/terapia , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/complicaciones , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/fisiopatología , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Memoria/fisiología , Trastornos Mentales/etiología , Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica , Calidad de Vida , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Trastornos del Sueño-Vigilia/etiología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Victoria
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA