Process evaluation of the implementation of the assessment of burden of chronic conditions tool in Dutch primary care – lessons from a qualitative implementation study.

Process evaluation of the implementation of the assessment of burden of chronic conditions tool in Dutch primary care – lessons from a qualitative implementation study.

Publication date: Jul 20, 2024

The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC-)tool is developed to facilitate a personalized approach to care in the patient-healthcare provider (HCP) conversation based on shared decision-making and individualized care plans. An effectiveness study highlighted its effect on the perceived quality of care and patient activation. Successful implementation of novel interventions necessitates an understanding of the user’s actual application, user experiences and an evaluation of implementation outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the ABCC-tool by HCPs in Dutch primary care. This study is the process evaluation of a larger type 1 effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial. Semi-structured interviews with HCPs, who were interventionists in the hybrid trial, were held at three and twelve months after they started using the ABCC-tool. The Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate implementation outcomes. The Implementation domain was further strengthened with an evaluation of implementation fidelity using Carroll’s framework. Inductive coding and thematic analysis were applied to identify relevant participant experiences and implementation outcomes within the RE-AIM framework. Seventeen HCPs (1 general practitioner, 16 practice nurses) participated in the study, representing 39% of potentially eligible participants. Most HCPs applied the tool after finishing their own routines instead of how it is intended to be used, namely from the beginning of the consultation. HCPs reached 2-6 patients. The ABCC-tool was initially adopted, but twelve HCPs stopped using the tool due to COVID-19 related cancellation of consultations. High fidelity was found for applying the questionnaire and visualization. Low fidelity was present for applying shared decision-making, formulating care goals and monitoring progress. HCPs indicated that maintaning the ABCC-tool depended on accompanying training and implementation support. HCPs applied the ABCC-tool critically different from intended, potentially diminishing its benefits and ease of use. This evaluation stresses the need for a tailored implementation plan that includes more detailed training and guidance on how and when to use the ABCC-tool.

Open Access PDF

Concepts Keywords
Covid Adult
Dutch Barriers
Interviews Chronic care
Months Chronic Disease
Nurses COVID-19
Decision Making, Shared
Facilitators
Female
Fidelity
Humans
Implementation science
Interviews as Topic
Male
Middle Aged
Netherlands
Primary care
Primary Health Care
Process-evaluation
Qualitative interview
Qualitative Research

Semantics

Type Source Name
disease IDO process
disease MESH chronic conditions
disease VO effectiveness
disease IDO quality
disease MESH COVID-19
disease IDO intervention
drug DRUGBANK Spinosad
disease VO protocol
disease VO population
disease MESH Asthma
pathway KEGG Asthma
disease MESH COPD
disease MESH Heart Failure
disease MESH Diabetes Mellitus
drug DRUGBANK Tretamine
disease VO effective
disease VO time
drug DRUGBANK Pentaerythritol tetranitrate
disease VO age
drug DRUGBANK Abacavir
drug DRUGBANK Coenzyme M
drug DRUGBANK Dimercaprol
drug DRUGBANK Tropicamide
drug DRUGBANK Methionine
disease MESH lifestyle
drug DRUGBANK Indoleacetic acid
drug DRUGBANK Trestolone
disease MESH multiple chronic conditions
disease MESH Mental illness

Original Article

(Visited 3 times, 1 visits today)