Grimshaw Jeremy M, Eccles Martin P, Greener Jenny, Maclennan Graeme, Ibbotson Tracy, Kahan James P, Sullivan Frank
Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Implement Sci. 2006 Feb 22;1:3. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-3.
There is only limited empirical evidence about the effectiveness of opinion leaders as health care change agents.
To test the feasibility of identifying, and the characteristics of, opinion leaders using a sociometric instrument and a self-designating instrument in different professional groups within the UK National Health Service.
Postal questionnaire survey.
All general practitioners, practice nurses and practice managers in two regions of Scotland. All physicians and surgeons (junior hospital doctors and consultants) and medical and surgical nursing staff in two district general hospitals and one teaching hospital in Scotland, as well as all Scottish obstetric and gynaecology, and oncology consultants.
Using the sociometric instrument, the extent of social networks and potential coverage of the study population in primary and secondary care was highly idiosyncratic. In contrast, relatively complex networks with good coverage rates were observed in both national specialty groups. Identified opinion leaders were more likely to have the expected characteristics of opinion leaders identified from diffusion and social influence theories. Moreover, opinion leaders appeared to be condition-specific. The self-designating instrument identified more opinion leaders, but it was not possible to estimate the extent and structure of social networks or likely coverage by opinion leaders. There was poor agreement in the responses to the sociometric and self-designating instruments.
The feasibility of identifying opinion leaders using an off-the-shelf sociometric instrument is variable across different professional groups and settings within the NHS. Whilst it is possible to identify opinion leaders using a self-designating instrument, the effectiveness of such opinion leaders has not been rigorously tested in health care settings. Opinion leaders appear to be monomorphic (different leaders for different issues). Recruitment of opinion leaders is unlikely to be an effective general strategy across all settings and professional groups; the more specialised the group, the more opinion leaders may be a useful strategy.
关于意见领袖作为医疗保健变革推动者的有效性,仅有有限的实证证据。
在英国国民医疗服务体系(NHS)的不同专业群体中,使用社会测量工具和自我指定工具来测试识别意见领袖的可行性及其特征。
邮寄问卷调查。
苏格兰两个地区的所有全科医生、执业护士和执业经理。苏格兰两家 district general hospitals 和一家教学医院的所有内科和外科医生(初级医院医生和顾问)以及内科和外科护理人员,以及所有苏格兰妇产科和肿瘤学顾问。
使用社会测量工具时,初级和二级医疗保健中研究人群的社交网络范围和潜在覆盖范围具有高度特殊性。相比之下,在两个全国性专业群体中都观察到了覆盖率良好的相对复杂的网络。识别出的意见领袖更有可能具有从扩散和社会影响理论中识别出的意见领袖的预期特征。此外,意见领袖似乎是特定情况的。自我指定工具识别出了更多的意见领袖,但无法估计社交网络的范围和结构或意见领袖可能的覆盖范围。对社会测量工具和自我指定工具的回答一致性较差。
在 NHS 内不同专业群体和环境中,使用现成的社会测量工具识别意见领袖的可行性各不相同。虽然使用自我指定工具可以识别意见领袖,但此类意见领袖在医疗保健环境中的有效性尚未经过严格测试。意见领袖似乎是单形的(不同问题有不同的领袖)。在所有环境和专业群体中招募意见领袖不太可能是一种有效的通用策略;群体越专业化,意见领袖可能越有用。