Institution for Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, University of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden -
Research Unit of Health Sciences and Technology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland -
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2023 Aug;59(4):488-501. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.23.07857-7. Epub 2023 Jul 24.
The Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ) measures facilitators or barriers of healthcare professionals' implementation behaviors based on the current implementation research on practice and policy. The DIBQ covers 18 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework and consists of 93 items. A previously tailored version (DIBQ-t) covering 10 domains and 28 items focuses on implementing best-practice low back pain care.
To tailor a shortened version of DIBQ to multiprofessional rehabilitation context with cross-cultural adaptation to Finnish language.
A two-round Delphi study.
National-level online survey.
Purposively recruited experts in multiprofessional rehabilitation (N.=25).
Cross-cultural translation of DIBQ to Finnish was followed by a two-round Delphi survey involving diverse experts in rehabilitation (physicians, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, nursing scientists, social scientists). In total, 25 experts in Round 1, and 21 in Round 2 evaluated the importance of DIBQ items in changing professionals' implementation behavior by rating on a 5-point Likert Scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) of including each item in the final scale. Consensus to include an item was defined as a mean score of ≥4 by ≥75% of Delphi participants. Open comments were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Items with agreement of ≤74% were either directly excluded or reconsidered and modified depending on qualitative judgements, amended with experts' suggestions. After completing an analogous second-round, a comparison with DIBQ-t was performed. Lastly, the relevance of each item was indexed using content validity index on item-level (I-CVI) and scale-level (S-CVI/Ave).
After Round 1, 17 items were included and 48 excluded by consensus whereas 28 items were reconsidered, and 20 items added for Round 2. The open comments were categorized as: 1) "modifying"; 2) "supportive"; and 3) "critical". After Round 2, consensus was reached regarding all items, to include 21 items. After comparison with DIBQ-t, the final multiprofessional DIBQ (DIBQ-mp) covers 11 TDF domains and 21 items with I-CVIs of ≥0.78 and S-CVI/Ave of 0.93.
A Delphi study condensed a DIBQ-mp with excellent content validity for multiprofessional rehabilitation context.
A potential tool for evaluating determinants in implementing evidence-based multiprofessional rehabilitation interventions.
实施行为问卷（DIBQ）基于当前实践和政策的实施研究，衡量医疗保健专业人员实施行为的促进因素或障碍。DIBQ 涵盖理论领域框架的 18 个领域，由 93 个项目组成。以前量身定制的版本（DIBQ-t）涵盖 10 个领域和 28 个项目，专注于实施最佳实践的腰痛护理。
针对多专业康复环境量身定制一个简短版本的 DIBQ，并进行跨文化适应芬兰语。
两轮 Delphi 研究。
国家级在线调查。
多专业康复领域的专家（N=25）。
对 DIBQ 进行跨文化翻译为芬兰语，然后进行两轮 Delphi 调查，涉及康复领域的各种专家（医生、物理治疗师、职业治疗师、心理学家、护理科学家、社会科学家）。共有 25 名专家在第一轮，21 名专家在第二轮中通过 5 分李克特量表（1=强烈不同意，5=强烈同意）评估 DIBQ 项目在改变专业人员实施行为方面的重要性，对包括每个项目的最终量表进行评分。共识将项目包括在内的定义为≥75%的 Delphi 参与者的平均得分为≥4。对开放式评论进行了归纳内容分析。对于同意率≤74%的项目，要么直接排除，要么根据定性判断重新考虑和修改，并根据专家的建议进行修改。完成类似的第二轮后，与 DIBQ-t 进行了比较。最后，使用项目水平的内容有效性指数（I-CVI）和量表水平的内容有效性指数（S-CVI/Ave）索引每个项目的相关性。
第一轮后，通过共识纳入 17 项，排除 48 项，重新考虑 28 项，纳入 20 项进行第二轮。开放式评论分为以下几类：1）“修改”；2）“支持”；和 3）“批评”。第二轮后，所有项目都达成了共识，包括 21 个项目。与 DIBQ-t 比较后，最终的多专业 DIBQ（DIBQ-mp）涵盖 11 个 TDF 领域和 21 个项目，项目水平的内容有效性指数（I-CVI）≥0.78，量表水平的内容有效性指数（S-CVI/Ave）为 0.93。
一项 Delphi 研究为多专业康复环境浓缩了具有极好内容有效性的 DIBQ-mp。
评估实施基于证据的多专业康复干预措施的决定因素的潜在工具。
Zotero 插件
