Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Nottingham School of Medicine, Nottingham, UK
Centre for Rehabilitation & Ageing Research, University of Nottingham School of Medicine, Nottingham, UK.
BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 31;12(3):e060294. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060294.
This study aimed to: (1) understand the context for delivering a trauma vocational rehabilitation (VR) intervention; (2) identify potential barriers and enablers to the implementation of a VR intervention post-trauma.
Qualitative study. Data were collected in person or via phone using different methods: 38 semistructured interviews, 11 informal 'walk-through care pathways' interviews, 5 focus groups (n=25), 5 codesign workshops (n=43). Data were thematically analysed using the framework approach, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
Stakeholders recruited across five UK major trauma networks.
A variety of stakeholders were recruited (n=117) including trauma survivors, rehabilitation physicians, therapists, psychologists, trauma coordinators and general practitioners. We recruited 32 service users (trauma survivors or carers) and 85 service providers.
There were several issues associated with implementing a trauma VR intervention including: culture within healthcare/employing organisations; extent to which healthcare systems were networked with other organisations; poor transition between different organisations; failure to recognise VR as a priority; external policies and funding. Some barriers were typical implementation issues (eg, funding, policies, openness to change). This study further highlighted the challenges associated with implementing a complex intervention like VR (eg, inadequate networking/communication, poor service provision, perceived VR priority). Our intervention was developed to overcome these barriers through adapting a therapist training package, and by providing early contact with patient/employer, a psychological component alongside occupational therapy, case coordination/central point of contact, and support crossing sector boundaries (eg, between health/employment/welfare).
Findings informed the implementation of our VR intervention within the complex trauma pathway. Although we understand how to embed it within this context, the success of its implementation needs to be measured as part of a process evaluation in a future trial.
本研究旨在:(1)了解提供创伤职业康复 (VR) 干预的背景;(2)确定创伤后实施 VR 干预的潜在障碍和促进因素。
定性研究。使用不同的方法在现场或通过电话收集数据:38 次半结构化访谈、11 次非正式“穿行护理途径”访谈、5 次焦点小组(n=25)、5 次共同设计研讨会(n=43)。使用框架方法对数据进行主题分析,该方法受实施研究综合框架的启发。
在五个英国主要创伤网络中招募利益相关者。
招募了各种利益相关者(n=117),包括创伤幸存者、康复医生、治疗师、心理学家、创伤协调员和全科医生。我们招募了 32 名服务用户(创伤幸存者或护理人员)和 85 名服务提供者。
实施创伤 VR 干预存在几个问题,包括:医疗保健/雇用组织内的文化;医疗系统与其他组织联网的程度;不同组织之间的过渡不良;未能将 VR 视为优先事项;外部政策和资金。一些障碍是典型的实施问题(例如,资金、政策、对变革的开放性)。本研究进一步强调了实施像 VR 这样的复杂干预措施所面临的挑战(例如,网络/沟通不足、服务提供不善、感知的 VR 优先级)。我们的干预措施是通过调整治疗师培训包,并通过与患者/雇主早期接触、提供心理组成部分、职业治疗、病例协调/联络点、并支持跨越部门边界(例如,在健康/就业/福利之间)来克服这些障碍而开发的。
研究结果为在复杂的创伤途径中实施我们的 VR 干预提供了信息。虽然我们了解如何将其嵌入到这种背景中,但作为未来试验中过程评估的一部分,需要对其实施的成功进行衡量。