Healthcare professionals’ perceptions on barriers and facilitators to DMARD use in rheumatoid arthritis

Background Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the cornerstone of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, the full benefits of DMARDs are often not realized because many patients are sub-optimally adherent to their medication. In order to optimize adherence, it is essential that healthcare professionals (HCPs) understand patients’ barriers and facilitators for medication use. Insight in these barriers and facilitators may foster the dialogue about adequate medication use between HCPs and patients. What HCPs perceive as barriers and facilitators has, so far, scarcely been investigated. This study aimed to identify the perceptions of HCPs on patients’ barriers and facilitators that might influence their adherence. Methods This qualitative study was performed using semi structured in-depth interviews with HCPs. An interview guide was used, based on an adjusted version of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Thematic analysis was conducted to identify factors that influence barriers and facilitators to DMARD use according to HCPs. Results Fifteen HCPs (5 rheumatologists, 5 nurses and 5 pharmacists) were interviewed. They mentioned a variety of factors that, according to their perceptions, influence DMARD adherence in patients with RA. Besides therapy-related factors, such as (onset of) medication effectiveness and side-effects, most variation was found within patient-related factors and reflected patients’ beliefs, ways of coping, and (self-management) skills toward medication and their condition. In addition, factors related to the condition (e.g., level of disease activity), healthcare team and system (e.g., trust in HCP), and social and economic context (e.g. support, work shifts) were reported. Conclusions This study provided insights in HCPs’ perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to DMARD use patients with RA. Most factors that were mentioned were patient-related and potentially modifiable. When physicians understand patients’ perceptions on medication use, adherence to DMARDs can probably be optimized in patients with RA leading to more effectiveness of treatment outcomes.

Barriers to implementation of pediatric emergency department interventions for parental tobacco use and dependence: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

Background Pediatric emergency department (PED) and urgent care (UC) professionals can play a key role in delivering evidence-based guidelines to address parental tobacco use and child tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). Understanding PED/UC professionals’ perceptions regarding these guidelines is the first step in developing and implementing a TSE screening and counseling intervention in these settings. This study aimed to use the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify current screening and counseling behaviors of PED/UC professionals related to parental tobacco use and child TSE, and determine barriers and enablers that influence these behaviors. Methods Semi-structured, focused interviews were conducted with 29 actively practicing PED/UC clinical staff who worked at one large, Midwestern children’s hospital. The interview guide was informed by the TDF and included open-ended questions. Content analysis of interview transcripts was guided by the TDF. Nurses, physicians, and healthcare administrators were assessed overall and by group membership to ensure each group was represented based on their varying PED/UC roles. Results Fifty-one percent were nurses, 38% were physicians, and 11% were healthcare administrators. Most PED/UC professionals did not currently follow the guidelines, but perceived addressing parental tobacco use as part of their role. All 14 TDF domains were identified by nurses, physicians, and administrators in relation to counseling for parental tobacco use and child TSE. Domains with the most sub-themes were (1) knowledge: lack of knowledge about tobacco counseling, including implementing counseling, cessation resources/referrals, and thirdhand smoke; (2) beliefs about capabilities: not comfortable counseling parents, easier to discuss with parents who are receptive and to ask and advise when patients have a TSE-related complaint, and more likely to discuss if there were resources/referrals; and (3) environmental context and resources: barriers include lack of time, training, and resources and referral information to give to parents, and an enabler is using TSE-related complaints as a context to offer counseling. Conclusions Study findings provide a strong foundation for developing and implementing clinical practice guidelines regarding parental tobacco use and child TSE in the PED/UC setting. Future intervention development will address all TDF domains and test the implementation of the intervention in the PED/UC setting.

Stakeholder views of the development of a clinical quality registry for interventional radiology: a qualitative study

Background Clinical quality registries (CQRs) can likely improve quality in healthcare and research. However, studies indicate that effective use of CQRs is hindered by lack of engagement and interest among stakeholders, as well as factors related to organisational context, registry design and data quality. To fulfil the potential of CQRs, more knowledge on stakeholders’ perceptions of the factors that will facilitate or hamper the development of CQRs is essential to the more appropriate targeting of registry implementation and the subsequent use of the data. The primary aim of this study was to examine factors that can potentially affect the development of a national CQR for interventional radiology in Norway from the perspective of stakeholders. Furthermore, we wanted to identify the intervention functions likely to enable CQR development. Only one such registry, located in Sweden, has been established. To provide a broader context for the Norwegian study, we also sought to investigate experiences with the development of this registry. Methods A qualitative study of ten Norwegian radiologists and radiographers using focus groups was conducted, and an in-depth interview with the initiator of the Swedish registry was carried out. Questions were based on the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation for Behaviour Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. The participants’ responses were categorised into predefined themes using a deductive process of thematic analysis. Results Knowledge of the rationale used in establishing a CQR, beliefs about the beneficial consequences of a registry for quality improvement and research and an opportunity to learn from a well-developed registry were perceived by the participants as factors facilitating CQR development. The study further identified a range of development barriers related to environmental and resource factors (e.g., a lack of organisational support, time) and individuallevel factors (e.g., role boundaries, resistance to change), as well as several intervention functions likely to be appropriate in targeting these barriers. Conclusion This study provides a deeper understanding of factors that may be involved in the behaviour of stakeholders regarding the development of a CQR. The findings may assist in designing, implementing and evaluating a methodologically rigorous CQR intervention.

Barriers and facilitators to changing bowel care practices after spinal cord injury: a Theoretical Domains Framework approach

Background Improvement to autonomic processes such as bladder, bowel and sexual function are prioritised by individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Bowel care is associated with high levels of dissatisfaction and decreased quality of life. Despite dissatisfaction, 71% of individuals have not changed their bowel care routine for at least 5 years, highlighting a disconnect between dissatisfaction with bowel care and changing routines to optimise bowel care. Objective Using an integrated knowledge translation approach, we aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to making changes to bowel care in individuals with SCI. Methods Our approach was guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel and used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals with SCI (n = 13, mean age 48.6 ± 13.1 years) and transcribed verbatim (duration 31.9 ± 7.1 min). Barriers and facilitators were extracted, deductively coded using TDF domains and inductively analysed for themes within domains. Results Changing bowel care after SCI was heavily influenced by four TDF domains: environmental context and resources (workplace flexibility, opportunity or circumstance, and access to resources); beliefs about consequences; social influences (perceived support and peer mentorship); and knowledge (knowledge of physiological processes and bowel care options). All intervention functions and policy categories were considered viable intervention options, with human (61%) and digital (33%) platforms preferred. Conclusions Modifying bowel care is a multi-factorial behaviour. These findings will support the systematic development and implementation of future interventions to both enable individuals with SCI to change their bowel care and to facilitate the optimisation of bowel care approaches.

Barriers and enablers to access childhood cataract services across India. A qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) of behaviour change

Early presentation for childhood cataract surgery is an important first step in preventing related visual impairment and blindness. In the absence of neonatal eye screening programmes in developing countries, the early identification of childhood cataract remains a major challenge. The primary aim of this study was to identify potential barriers to accessing childhood cataract services from the perspective of parents and carers, as a critical step towards increasing the timely uptake of cataract surgery. In-depth interviews were conducted using a pre-designed topic guide developed for this study to seek the views of parents and carers in nine geographic locations across eight states in India regarding their perceived barriers and enablers to accessing childhood cataract services. A total of 35 in-depth interviews were conducted including 30 at the hospital premises and 5 in the participants’ homes. All interviews were conducted in the local language and audio taped for further transcription and analysis. Data were organised using NVivo 11 and a thematic analysis was conducted utilising the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), an integrative framework of behavioural theories. The themes identified from interviews related to 11 out of 12 TDF domains. TDF domains associated with barriers included: ‘Environmental context and resources’, ‘Beliefs about consequences’ and ‘Social influences’. Reported enablers were identified in three theoretical domains: ‘Social influences’, ‘Beliefs about consequences’ and ‘Motivations and goals’. This comprehensive TDF approach enabled us to understand parents’ perceived barriers and enablers to accessing childhood cataract services, which could be targeted in future interventions to improve timely uptake.

Patient, carer and healthcare professional perspectives on increasing calorie intake in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

Objectives Research suggests that higher Body Mass Index is associated with improved survival in people with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (pwALS). Yet, understanding of the barriers and enablers to increasing calorie intake is limited. This study sought to explore these issues from the perspective of pwALS, informal carers, and healthcare professionals. Methods Interviews with 18 pwALS and 16 informal carers, and focus groups with 51 healthcare professionals. Data were analysed using template analysis and mapped to the COM-B model and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Results All three COM-B components (Capability, Opportunity and Motivation) are important to achieving high calorie diets in pwALS. Eleven TDF domains were identified: Physical skills (ALS symptoms); Knowledge (about high calorie diets and healthy eating); Memory, attention, and decision processes (reflecting cognitive difficulties); Environmental context/resources (availability of informal and formal carers); Social influences (social aspects of eating); Beliefs about consequences (healthy eating vs. high calorie diets); Identity (interest in health lifestyles); Goals (sense of control); Reinforcement (eating habits); and Optimism and Emotion (low mood, poor appetite). Discussion To promote high calorie diets for pwALS, greater clarity around the rationale and content of recommended diets is needed. Interventions should be tailored to patient symptoms, preferences, motivations, and opportunities.