Client and staff perceptions of acceptability of MyCheck: a direct-to-pathology telehealth and e-testing service for comprehensive bloodborne virus and sexually transmissible infection screening.

Background Sydney Sexual Health Centre (SSHC) is the largest sexual health clinic in New South Wales (NSW), servicing clients at high risk of sexually transmissible infections and bloodborne viruses. SSHC piloted a direct-to-pathology pathway that facilitated bloodborne virus/sexually transmissible infection testing at one of the ~500 participating pathology collection centres located across NSW. This qualitative study sought to understand SSHC client and provider perspectives of acceptability of the MyCheck intervention. Methods Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 11 clients who underwent testing via the MyCheck pathway and eight staff members involved in implementing MyCheck. The seven components of Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability informed this analysis. Results Participants broadly conveyed 'affective attitude' toward the MyCheck pathway. The telehealth intervention reduced client 'burden' and 'opportunity cost' through enabling greater testing convenience at a location suitable to them and provided timely results. Issues of 'ethicality' were raised by clients and staff as pathology centre staff were, on a few occasions, regarded as being judgmental of SSHC clients. 'Intervention coherence' issues were largely attributed to pathology centre personnel being unfamiliar with the intervention, with billing issues being a recurrent concern. Participants perceived MyCheck as an 'effective' testing pathway. SSHC staff were able to offer the intervention with ease through seamless IT integration ('self-efficacy'). Conclusion The MyCheck intervention was perceived by both SSHC clients and staff as an acceptable bloodborne virus/sexually transmissible infection testing pathway. However, further work is required to address stigma experienced by some clients when attending pathology collection centres.

The association between the receipt of primary care clinician provision of preventive care and short term health behaviour change.

Primary healthcare services are recommended to provide preventive care to address chronic disease risk behaviours. However, all care elements are infrequently provided, and there is a need to understand the impact of partial care provision on behaviour change. This study examined the association between variable levels of preventive care receipt from primary care clinicians on short-term behaviour change for four risk behaviours. A survey was undertaken with 5639 Australian community health service clients (2009-2014). Clients self-reported: engagement in risk behaviours (tobacco smoking, harmful alcohol consumption, inadequate fruit and/or vegetable consumption, physical inactivity) in the month prior to and four week post their community health service appointment; receipt of preventive care during appointments (assessment, advice, referral/follow-up) for each behaviour. Univariate regression models explored the association between change in risk status and preventive care received. The odds of behaviour change for those receiving all three care elements was significant for all behaviours, compared to no care, ranging from 2.02 (alcohol consumption, 95% CI 1.16-3.49) to 4.17 (inadequate fruit and/or vegetable consumption, 95% CI 2.91-5.96). Receipt of both assessment and advice increased the odds of behaviour change, compared to no care, for all behaviours except smoking, ranging from 2.32 (physical inactivity, 95% CI 1.60-3.35) to 2.83 (alcohol consumption, 95% CI 1.84-4.33). Receipt of 'assessment only' increased the odds of behaviour change, compared to no care, for inadequate fruit and/or vegetable consumption (OR = 2.40, 95% CI 1.60-3.59) and physical inactivity (OR = 2.81, 95% CI 1.89-4.17). Results highlight the importance of primary care clinicians providing best practice preventive care to maximise client behaviour change.

Increasing the provision of preventive care by community healthcare services: a stepped wedge implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Although clinical guidelines recommend the provision of care to reduce client chronic disease risk behaviours, such care is provided sub-optimally by primary healthcare providers. A study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of an intervention in increasing community-based clinician implementation of multiple elements of recommended preventive care for four risk behaviours. METHODS: A three-group stepped-wedge trial was undertaken with all 56 community-based primary healthcare facilities in one health district in New South Wales, Australia. A 12-month implementation intervention was delivered sequentially in each of three geographically and administratively defined groups of facilities. The intervention consisted of six key strategies: leadership and consensus processes, enabling systems, educational meetings and training, audit and feedback, practice change support, and practice change information and resources. Client-reported receipt of three elements of preventive care: assessment; brief advice; referral for four behavioural risks: smoking, inadequate fruit and/or vegetable consumption, alcohol overconsumption, and physical inactivity, individually, and for all such risks combined were collected for 56 months (October 2009-May 2014). Segmented logistic regression models were developed to assess intervention effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 5369 clients participated in data collection. Significant increases were found for receipt of four of five assessment outcomes (smoking OR 1.53; fruit and/or vegetable intake OR 2.18; alcohol consumption OR 1.69; all risks combined OR 1.78) and two of five brief advice outcomes (fruit and/or vegetable intake OR 2.05 and alcohol consumption OR 2.64). No significant increases in care delivery were observed for referral for any risk behaviour, or for physical inactivity. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation intervention was effective in enhancing assessment of client risk status but less so for elements of care that could reduce client risk: provision of brief advice and referral. The intervention was ineffective in increasing care addressing physical inactivity. Further research is required to identify barriers to the provision of preventive care and the effectiveness of practice change interventions in increasing its provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611001284954 . Registered 15 December 2011. Retrospectively registered.

Increasing smoking cessation care across a network of hospitals: an implementation study.

BACKGROUND: Despite clinical practice guidelines recommending the provision of smoking cessation care to all smokers in hospital, the provision of such care can be sub-optimal. A study was conducted to assess the impact of an intervention on the provision of smoking cessation care to nicotine-dependent smokers across a network of hospitals. METHODS: A 4-year interrupted time series study was undertaken in a single health district in New South Wales, Australia. A multi-component intervention was implemented over a 2-year period in all 37 public general hospitals. Outcome data were collected from eight randomly selected hospitals via medical record audit. Logistic regression analyses assessed differences between baseline, intervention and follow-up periods in the provision of seven measures of care: brief advice, offer and provision of inpatient and discharge nicotine replacement therapy, and offer and acceptance of referral to a Quitline. RESULTS: Approximately 164,250 patients were discharged from the hospitals during the study, 16 % of whom were smokers. Of the selected smokers, 56.12 % (n = 2072) were nicotine-dependent. The prevalence of smoking cessation care increased significantly for all seven measures between baseline and intervention periods, and for six of the seven measures between the baseline and follow-up periods. The odds of receiving care at follow-up were between 1.7 (CI 1.18-2.58, p = 0.0004) and 6.2 (CI 2.84-13.85, p < 0.0001) times greater than at baseline. At follow-up, 53, 16 and 7 of smokers were offered inpatient NRT, discharge NRT and a Quitline referral, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gains in the provision of smoking cessation care were indicated. However, at best, slightly more than half of the patients received smoking cessation care. Additional care enhancement strategies are required if all smokers are to obtain the intended benefits of smoking cessation care guidelines.

Clinician assessment, advice and referral for multiple health risk behaviors: prevalence and predictors of delivery by primary health care nurses and allied health professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Primary care clinicians have considerable potential to provide preventive care. This study describes their preventive care delivery. METHODS: A survey of 384 community health nurses and allied health clinicians from in New South Wales, Australia was undertaken (2010-11) to examine the assessment of client risk, provision of brief advice and referral/follow-up regarding smoking inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol misuse, and physical inactivity; the existence of preventive care support strategies; and the association between supports and preventive care provision. RESULTS: Preventive care to 80% or more clients was least often provided for referral/follow-up (24.7-45.6% of clinicians for individual risks, and 24.2% for all risks) and most often for assessment (34.4-69.3% of clinicians for individual risks, and 24.4% for all risks). Approximately 75% reported having 9 or fewer of 17 supports. Provision of care was associated with: availability of a paper screening tool; training; GP referral letter; and number of supports. CONCLUSION: The delivery of preventive care was limited, and varied according to type of care and risk. Supports were variably associated with elements of preventive care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Further research is required to increase routine preventive care delivery and the availability of supports.

The effectiveness of an intervention in increasing community health clinician provision of preventive care: a study protocol of a non-randomised, multiple-baseline trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary behavioural risks for the most common causes of mortality and morbidity in developed countries are tobacco smoking, poor nutrition, risky alcohol use, and physical inactivity. Evidence, guidelines and policies support routine clinician delivery of care to prevent these risks within primary care settings. Despite the potential afforded by community health services for the delivery of such preventive care, the limited evidence available suggests it is provided at suboptimal levels. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategic practice change intervention in increasing clinician's routine provision of preventive care across a network of community health services. METHODS/DESIGN: A multiple baseline study will be conducted involving all 56 community health facilities in a single health district in New South Wales, Australia. The facilities will be allocated to one of three administratively-defined groups. A 12 month practice change intervention will be implemented in all facilities in each group to facilitate clinician risk assessment of eligible clients, and clinician provision of brief advice and referral to those identified as being 'at risk'. The intervention will be implemented in a non-random sequence across the three facility groups. Repeated, cross-sectional measurement of clinician provision of preventive care for four individual risks (smoking, poor nutrition, risky alcohol use, and physical inactivity) will occur continuously for all three facility groups for 54 months via telephone interviews. The interviews will be conducted with randomly selected clients who have visited a community health facility in the last two weeks. Data collection will commence 12 months prior to the implementation of the intervention in the first group, and continue for six months following the completion of the intervention in the last group. As a secondary source of data, telephone interviews will be undertaken prior to and following the intervention with randomly selected samples of clinicians from each facility group to assess the reported provision of preventive care, and the acceptability of the practice change intervention and implementation. DISCUSSION: The study will provide novel evidence regarding the ability to increase clinician's routine provision of preventive care across a network of community health facilities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611001284954 UNIVERSAL TRIAL NUMBER (UTN): U1111-1126-3465.