Suppr超能文献

促进医疗保健领域的职业行为改变:哪些干预措施有效,原因何在?基于理论的系统评价综述

Promoting professional behaviour change in healthcare: what interventions work, and why? A theory-led overview of systematic reviews.

作者信息

Johnson Mark J, May Carl R

机构信息

National Institute for Health Research, Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, and University of Southampton, Southampton, UK University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.

University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2015 Sep 30;5(9):e008592. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008592.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Translating research evidence into routine clinical practice is notoriously difficult. Behavioural interventions are often used to change practice, although their success is variable and the characteristics of more successful interventions are unclear. We aimed to establish the characteristics of successful behaviour change interventions in healthcare.

DESIGN

We carried out a systematic overview of systematic reviews on the effectiveness of behaviour change interventions with a theory-led analysis using the constructs of normalisation process theory (NPT). MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched electronically from inception to July 2015.

SETTING

Primary and secondary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were any patients and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews who met the inclusion criteria of having examined the effectiveness of professional interventions in improving professional practice and/or patient outcomes.

INTERVENTIONS

Professional interventions as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Success of each intervention in changing practice or patient outcomes, and their mechanisms of action. Reviews were coded as to the interventions included, how successful they had been and which NPT constructs its component interventions covered.

RESULTS

Searches identified 4724 articles, 67 of which met the inclusion criteria. Interventions fell into three main categories: persuasive; educational and informational; and action and monitoring. Interventions focusing on action or education (eg, Audit and Feedback, Reminders, Educational Outreach) acted on the NPT constructs of Collective Action and Reflexive Monitoring, and reviews using them tended to report more positive outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This theory-led analysis suggests that interventions which contribute to normative restructuring of practice, modifying peer group norms and expectations (eg, educational outreach) and relational restructuring, reinforcing modified peer group norms by emphasising the expectations of an external reference group (eg, Reminders, Audit and Feedback), offer the best chances of success. Combining such interventions is most likely to change behaviour.

摘要

目的

将研究证据转化为常规临床实践的难度众所周知。行为干预常常被用于改变临床实践,但其效果不一,较为成功的干预措施的特征也并不明确。我们旨在确定医疗保健领域中成功的行为改变干预措施的特征。

设计

我们对关于行为改变干预措施有效性的系统评价进行了系统综述,并运用规范过程理论(NPT)的构建进行理论导向分析。从数据库建立至2015年7月,我们通过电子检索了MEDLINE、CINAHL、PsychINFO和Cochrane图书馆。

背景

初级和二级医疗保健。

参与者

系统评价中的任何患者和医疗保健专业人员,他们符合纳入标准,即研究了专业干预措施在改善专业实践和/或患者结局方面的有效性。

干预措施

由Cochrane有效实践与护理组织审查小组定义的专业干预措施。

主要和次要结局指标

每项干预措施在改变实践或患者结局方面的成功程度及其作用机制。对综述进行编码,内容包括所纳入的干预措施、其成功程度以及其组成干预措施涵盖哪些NPT构建。

结果

检索到4724篇文章,其中67篇符合纳入标准。干预措施主要分为三大类:说服性;教育和信息性;行动和监测。侧重于行动或教育的干预措施(如审核与反馈、提醒、教育外展)作用于NPT的集体行动和反思性监测构建,使用这些措施的综述往往报告更积极的结果。

结论

这项理论导向分析表明,有助于实践规范重构、改变同行群体规范和期望(如教育外展)以及关系重构、通过强调外部参照群体的期望强化改变后的同行群体规范(如提醒、审核与反馈)的干预措施,成功的机会最大。将此类干预措施结合起来最有可能改变行为。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验