French Beverley, Thomas Lois H, Harrison Joanna, Burton Christopher R, Forshaw Denise, Booth Joanne, Britt David, Cheater Francine M, Roe Brenda, Watkins Caroline L
University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom.
University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom
Qual Health Res. 2016 Aug;26(10):1393-408. doi: 10.1177/1049732316630975. Epub 2016 Mar 1.
We explored health professionals' views of implementing a systematic voiding program (SVP) in a multi-site qualitative process evaluation in stroke services recruited to the intervention arms of a cluster randomized controlled feasibility trial during 2011-2013. We conducted semi-structured group or individual interviews with 38 purposively selected nursing, managerial, and care staff involved in delivering the SVP. Content analysis of transcripts used normalization process theory (NPT) as a pre-specified organization-level exploratory framework. Barriers to implementing the SVP included perceived lack of suitability for some patient groups, patient fear of extending hospital stay, and difficulties with SVP enactment, scheduling, timing, recording, and monitoring. Enablers included the guidance provided by the SVP, patient and relative involvement, extra staff, improved nursing skill and confidence, and experience of success. Three potential mechanisms of consistency, visibility, and individualization linked the SVP process with improvements in outcome, and should be emphasized in SVP implementation.
在2011年至2013年期间,我们在一项整群随机对照可行性试验的干预组招募的中风服务机构中,通过多地点定性过程评估,探讨了卫生专业人员对实施系统排尿计划(SVP)的看法。我们对38名经过有目的挑选的参与实施SVP的护理、管理和护理人员进行了半结构化的小组或个人访谈。对访谈记录的内容分析使用了规范化过程理论(NPT)作为预先指定的组织层面探索性框架。实施SVP的障碍包括认为该计划不适用于某些患者群体、患者担心延长住院时间以及SVP的制定、安排、时间、记录和监测方面的困难。促进因素包括SVP提供的指导、患者及亲属的参与、额外的工作人员、护理技能和信心的提高以及成功经验。一致性、可见性和个性化这三种潜在机制将SVP过程与结果改善联系起来,在SVP实施中应予以强调。