• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
Factors influencing fidelity to guideline implementation strategies for improving pain care at cancer centres: a qualitative sub-study of the Stop Cancer PAIN Trial.影响癌症中心改善疼痛护理指南实施策略一致性的因素:停止癌症疼痛试验的定性子研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Aug 22;24(1):969. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11243-1.
2
Protocol for a phase III pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening and guidelines with, versus without, implementation strategies for improving pain in adults with cancer attending outpatient oncology and palliative care services: the Stop Cancer PAIN trial.一项 III 期实用阶梯式随机对照集群临床试验方案,旨在比较在改善接受肿瘤门诊和姑息治疗服务的成年癌症患者疼痛方面,使用与不使用实施策略的筛查和指南的有效性和成本效益:停止癌症疼痛试验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jul 16;18(1):558. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3318-0.
3
A phase III wait-listed randomised controlled trial of novel targeted inter-professional clinical education intervention to improve cancer patients' reported pain outcomes (The Cancer Pain Assessment (CPAS) Trial): study protocol.一项关于新型针对性跨专业临床教育干预以改善癌症患者报告的疼痛结局的III期等待名单随机对照试验(癌症疼痛评估(CPAS)试验):研究方案
Trials. 2019 Jan 18;20(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3152-z.
4
Stakeholder perspectives of a pilot multicomponent delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in palliative care units: A behaviour change theory-based qualitative study.利益相关者对姑息治疗病房中晚期癌症成人患者进行多组分谵妄预防干预的试点的看法:基于行为改变理论的定性研究。
Palliat Med. 2022 Sep;36(8):1273-1284. doi: 10.1177/02692163221113163. Epub 2022 Aug 11.
5
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
6
Clinician-led improvement in cancer care (CLICC)--testing a multifaceted implementation strategy to increase evidence-based prostate cancer care: phased randomised controlled trial--study protocol.以临床医生为主导的癌症护理改善(CLICC)——测试一种多方面的实施策略,以增加基于证据的前列腺癌护理:分阶段随机对照试验——研究方案。
Implement Sci. 2014 May 29;9:64. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-64.
7
Evaluation of a targeted, theory-informed implementation intervention designed to increase uptake of emergency management recommendations regarding adult patients with mild traumatic brain injury: results of the NET cluster randomised trial.评价一项针对特定人群、基于理论的实施干预措施,旨在提高对成人轻度创伤性脑损伤患者的紧急管理建议的接受度:NET 群组随机试验的结果。
Implement Sci. 2019 Jan 17;14(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0841-7.
8
Effect of Cancer Pain Guideline Implementation on Pain Outcomes Among Adult Outpatients With Cancer-Related Pain: A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial.癌症相关疼痛成人门诊患者中实施癌症疼痛指南对疼痛结局的影响:一项 stepped-wedge 聚类随机试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Feb 1;5(2):e220060. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.0060.
9
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
10
A multidisciplinary team-oriented intervention to increase guideline recommended care for high-risk prostate cancer: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised implementation trial.多学科团队导向干预以增加高危前列腺癌的指南推荐护理:一项阶梯式楔形集群随机实施试验。
Implement Sci. 2018 Mar 12;13(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0733-x.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Cancer Clinical Care Using Electronic Administration and Telehealth Technologies: Realist Synthesis of Potential Mechanisms for Improving Health Outcomes.使用电子管理和远程医疗技术在常规癌症临床护理中评估患者报告的结果:改善健康结果的潜在机制的实际综合分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Nov 28;25:e48483. doi: 10.2196/48483.
2
Staff- and service-level factors associated with organisational readiness to implement a clinical pathway for the identification, assessment, and management of anxiety and depression in adults with cancer.与组织准备实施成人癌症患者焦虑和抑郁的识别、评估和管理临床路径相关的人员和服务水平因素。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Aug 15;23(1):866. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09829-2.
3
The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology-a systematic review.临床指南实施策略在肿瘤学中的有效性——系统评价。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Apr 6;23(1):347. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x.
4
Understanding the Role of Clinical Champions and Their Impact on Clinician Behavior Change: The Need for Causal Pathway Mechanisms.理解临床倡导者的角色及其对临床医生行为改变的影响:对因果路径机制的需求。
Front Health Serv. 2022 Jul 13;2:896885. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.896885. eCollection 2022.
5
The Effects of Patient-Reported Outcome Screening on the Survival of People with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.患者报告结局筛查对癌症患者生存的影响:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Nov 7;14(21):5470. doi: 10.3390/cancers14215470.
6
The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback.基于用户反馈的更新的实施研究综合框架。
Implement Sci. 2022 Oct 29;17(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0.
7
The effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations in health care: a systematic review.倡导者在医疗保健领域实施创新中的有效性:一项系统综述。
Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Jul 22;3(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s43058-022-00315-0.
8
Effect of Cancer Pain Guideline Implementation on Pain Outcomes Among Adult Outpatients With Cancer-Related Pain: A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial.癌症相关疼痛成人门诊患者中实施癌症疼痛指南对疼痛结局的影响:一项 stepped-wedge 聚类随机试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Feb 1;5(2):e220060. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.0060.
9
Living systematic review to assess the analgesic undertreatment in cancer patients.针对癌症患者镇痛不足进行的系统评价。
Pain Pract. 2022 Apr;22(4):487-496. doi: 10.1111/papr.13098. Epub 2022 Jan 23.
10
A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance.制定和评估复杂干预措施的新框架:对医学研究理事会指南的更新。
BMJ. 2021 Sep 30;374:n2061. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n2061.

影响癌症中心改善疼痛护理指南实施策略一致性的因素:停止癌症疼痛试验的定性子研究。

Factors influencing fidelity to guideline implementation strategies for improving pain care at cancer centres: a qualitative sub-study of the Stop Cancer PAIN Trial.

机构信息

IMPACCT Centre-Improving Palliative, Aged and Chronic Care through Clinical Research and Translation, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Building 10, 235 Jones St, Ultimo, Sydney, NSW, 2007, Australia.

School of Nursing and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Aug 22;24(1):969. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11243-1.

DOI:10.1186/s12913-024-11243-1
PMID:39174979
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11342688/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Stop Cancer PAIN Trial was a phase III pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial which compared effectiveness of screening and guidelines with or without implementation strategies for improving pain in adults with cancer attending six Australian outpatient comprehensive cancer centres (n = 688). A system for pain screening was introduced before observation of a 'control' phase. Implementation strategies introduced in the 'intervention' phase included: (1) audit of adherence to guideline recommendations, with feedback to clinical teams; (2) health professional education via an email-administered 'spaced education' module; and (3) a patient education booklet and self-management resource. Selection of strategies was informed by the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) Model (Michie et al., 2011) and evidence for each strategy's stand-alone effectiveness. A consultant physician at each centre supported the intervention as a 'clinical champion'. However, fidelity to the intervention was limited, and the Trial did not demonstrate effectiveness. This paper reports a sub-study of the Trial which aimed to identify factors inhibiting or enabling fidelity to inform future guideline implementation initiatives.

METHODS

The qualitative sub-study enabled in-depth exploration of factors from the perspectives of personnel at each centre. Clinical champions, clinicians and clinic receptionists were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Analysis used a framework method and a largely deductive approach based on the COM-B Model.

RESULTS

Twenty-four people participated, including 15 physicians, 8 nurses and 1 clinic receptionist. Coding against the COM-B Model identified 'capability' to be the most influential component, with 'opportunity' and 'motivation' playing largely subsidiary roles. Findings suggest that fidelity could have been improved by: considering the readiness for change of each clinical setting; better articulating the intervention's value proposition; defining clinician roles and responsibilities, addressing perceptions that pain care falls beyond oncology clinicians' scopes of practice; integrating the intervention within existing systems and processes; promoting patient-clinician partnerships; investing in clinical champions among senior nursing and junior medical personnel, supported by medical leaders; and planning for slow incremental change rather than rapid uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

Future guideline implementation interventions may require a 'meta-implementation' approach based on complex systems theory to successfully integrate multiple strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registry: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; number: ACTRN 12615000064505; data: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspxid=367236&isReview=true .

摘要

背景

Stop Cancer PAIN 试验是一项 III 期实用阶梯式楔形聚类随机对照试验,比较了在澳大利亚六家综合癌症中心就诊的成年癌症患者中进行疼痛筛查和指南(有或没有实施策略)的有效性(n=688)。在观察“对照”阶段之前引入了疼痛筛查系统。在“干预”阶段引入的实施策略包括:(1)对遵守指南建议进行审核,并向临床团队提供反馈;(2)通过电子邮件管理的“间隔教育”模块对卫生专业人员进行教育;(3)患者教育手册和自我管理资源。策略的选择是根据能力、机会和动机行为(COM-B)模型(Michie 等人,2011 年)和每个策略独立有效性的证据来确定的。每个中心的顾问医师都支持该干预措施作为“临床冠军”。然而,对干预措施的遵从性有限,并且试验并未显示出有效性。本文报告了该试验的一项子研究,旨在确定影响遵从性的因素,以为未来的指南实施计划提供信息。

方法

该定性子研究使我们能够从每个中心人员的角度深入探讨因素。邀请临床冠军、临床医生和诊所接待员参加半结构化访谈。分析采用了框架方法和基于 COM-B 模型的主要演绎方法。

结果

共有 24 人参加,包括 15 名医生、8 名护士和 1 名诊所接待员。根据 COM-B 模型进行编码,确定“能力”是最具影响力的因素,而“机会”和“动机”则起着次要作用。研究结果表明,可以通过以下方式提高一致性:考虑每个临床环境的变革准备情况;更好地阐明干预措施的价值主张;定义临床医生的角色和责任,解决疼痛护理超出肿瘤临床医生工作范围的看法;将干预措施纳入现有系统和流程;促进医患合作关系;在高级护理和初级医疗人员中投资于临床冠军,由医学领导者提供支持;并计划进行缓慢的渐进式变革,而不是快速采用。

结论

未来的指南实施干预措施可能需要基于复杂系统理论的“元实施”方法,以成功整合多种策略。

试验注册

澳大利亚新西兰临床试验注册处;注册号:ACTRN 12615000064505;数据:https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspxid=367236&isReview=true 。