Application of theory to enhance audit and feedback interventions to increase the uptake of evidence-based transfusion practice: an intervention development protocol

Natalie J Gould, Fabiana Lorencatto, Simon J Stanworth, Susan Michie, Maria E Prior, Liz Glidewell, Jeremy M Grimshaw, Jill J Francis, Natalie J Gould, Fabiana Lorencatto, Simon J Stanworth, Susan Michie, Maria E Prior, Liz Glidewell, Jeremy M Grimshaw, Jill J Francis

Abstract

Background: Audits of blood transfusion demonstrate around 20% transfusions are outside national recommendations and guidelines. Audit and feedback is a widely used quality improvement intervention but effects on clinical practice are variable, suggesting potential for enhancement. Behavioural theory, theoretical frameworks of behaviour change and behaviour change techniques provide systematic processes to enhance intervention. This study is part of a larger programme of work to promote the uptake of evidence-based transfusion practice.

Objectives: The objectives of this study are to design two theoretically enhanced audit and feedback interventions; one focused on content and one on delivery, and investigate the feasibility and acceptability.

Methods: Study A (Content): A coding framework based on current evidence regarding audit and feedback, and behaviour change theory and frameworks will be developed and applied as part of a structured content analysis to specify the key components of existing feedback documents. Prototype feedback documents with enhanced content and also a protocol, describing principles for enhancing feedback content, will be developed. Study B (Delivery): Individual semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals and observations of team meetings in four hospitals will be used to specify, and identify views about, current audit and feedback practice. Interviews will be based on a topic guide developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Analysis of transcripts based on these frameworks will form the evidence base for developing a protocol describing an enhanced intervention that focuses on feedback delivery. Study C (Feasibility and Acceptability): Enhanced interventions will be piloted in four hospitals. Semi-structured interviews, questionnaires and observations will be used to assess feasibility and acceptability.

Discussion: This intervention development work reflects the UK Medical Research Council's guidance on development of complex interventions, which emphasises the importance of a robust theoretical basis for intervention design and recommends systematic assessment of feasibility and acceptability prior to taking interventions to evaluation in a full-scale randomised study. The work-up includes specification of current practice so that, in the trials to be conducted later in this programme, there will be a clear distinction between the control (usual practice) conditions and the interventions to be evaluated.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
AFFINITIE Programme work streams overview.

References

    1. Bolton-Maggs PHB. ᅟ. In: Poles D, Watt A, Thomas D, Cohen H, on behalf of the Serious Hazards of Transfusion (SHOT) Steering Group, editors. The 2012 Annual SHOT Report. 2013.
    1. Stainsby D, Jones H, Asher D, Atterbury C, Boncinelli A, Brant L, Chapman CE, Davison K, Gerrard R, Gray A, Knowles S, Love EM, Milkins C, McClelland DB, Norfolk DR, Soldan K, Taylor C, Revill J, Williamson LM, Cohen H, SHOT Steering Group Serious hazards of transfusion: a decade of haemovigilance in the UK. Transfus Med Rev. 2006;20(4):273–282. doi: 10.1016/j.tmrv.2006.05.002.
    1. British Committee for Standards in Haematology . ᅟ. ᅟ.
    1. Cochrane Library Special Collection . Avoiding unnecessary transfusion. 2012.
    1. Murphy MF, Waters JH, Wood EM, Yazer MH. Transfusing blood safely and appropriately. BMJ. 2013;347:f4303. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f4303.
    1. Carson JL, Carless PA, Hebert PC. Transfusion thresholds and other strategies for guiding allogeneic red blood cell transfusion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;4:CD002042.
    1. Estcourt L, Stanworth S, Doree C, Hopewell S, Murphy MF, Tinmouth A, Heddle N. Prophylactic platelet transfusion for prevention of bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;5:CD004269.
    1. NHS Blood and Transplant . National Comparative Audit of Blood Transfusion. ᅟ.
    1. Grimshaw JMG, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-50.
    1. French SD, Green SE, O'Connor DA, McKenzie JE, Francis JJ, Michie S, Buchbinder R, Schattner P, Spike N, Grimshaw JM. Developing theory-informed behaviour change interventions to implement evidence into practice: a systematic approach using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Implement Sci. 2012;7:38. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-38.
    1. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, O'Brien MA, Johansen M, Grimshaw J, Oxman AD. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6:CD000259.
    1. Ivers NM, Sales A, Colquhoun H, Michie S, Foy R, Francis JJ, Grimshaw JM. No more ‘business as usual’ with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):14. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-14.
    1. Foy R, Eccles M, Jamtvedt G, Young J, Grimshaw JM, Baker R. What do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:50. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-5-50.
    1. Gardner B, Whittington C, McAteer J, Eccles MP, Michie S. Using theory to synthesise evidence from behaviour change interventions: the example of audit and feedback. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70(10):1618–1625. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.039.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Francis JJ, Hardeman W, Eccles M. From theory to intervention: mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Appl Psychol. 2008;57(4):660–680. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00341.x.
    1. Michie S, Abraham C. Interventions to change health behaviours: evidence-based or evidence-inspired? Psychol Health. 2004;19(1):29–49. doi: 10.1080/0887044031000141199.
    1. Michie S, Campbell R, Brown J, West R. ABC of Theories of Behaviour Change. London: Silverback Publishing; 2014.
    1. Michie S, Atkins L, West R. The Behaviour Change Wheel Guide to Designing Interventions. London: Silverback Publishing; 2014.
    1. Francis JJ, O’Connor D, Curran J. Theories of behaviour change synthesized into a set of theoretical groupings: introducing a thematic series on the theoretical domains framework. Implement Sci. 2012;7:35. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-35.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A, Psychological Theory Group Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14(1):26–33. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.011155.
    1. Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behavior change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:37. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-37.
    1. Duncan EM, Francis JJ, Johnston M, Davey P, Maxwell S, McKay GA, McLay J, Ross S, Ryan C, Webb DJ, Bond C, on behalf of the PROTECT Study Group Learning curves, taking instructions and patient safety: using a theoretical domains framework in an interview study to investigate prescribing errors among trainee doctors. Implement Sci. 2012;7:86. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-86.
    1. Glidewell L, Boocock S, Pine K, Campbell R, Hackett J, Gill S, Wilkie M, on behalf of the Yorkshire and Humber Shared Haemodialysis Care team Using behavioural theories to optimise Shared Haemodialysis Care: A qualitative intervention development study of patient and professional experience. Implement Sci. 2013;8:118. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-118.
    1. Islam R, Tinmouth AT, Francis JJ, Brehaut JC, Born J, Stockton C, Stanworth SJ, Eccles MP, Cuthburtson BH, Hyde C, Grimshaw JM. A cross-country comparison of intensive care physicians’ beliefs about their transfusion behaviour: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework. Implement Sci. 2012;7:93. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-93.
    1. Patey AM, Islam R, Francis JJ, Bryson GL, Grimshaw JM, for the Canada PRIME Plus Team Anesthesiologists’ and surgeons’ perceptions about routine pre-operative testing in low-risk patients: application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify factors that influence physicians’ decisions to order pre-operative tests. Implement Sci. 2012;7:52. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-52.
    1. Francis JJ, Stockton C, Eccles MP, Johnston M, Cuthbertson BH, Grimshaw JM, Hyde C, Tinmouth A, Stanworth SJ. Evidence-based selection of theories for designing behaviour change interventions: Using methods based on theoretical construct domains to understand clinicians’ blood transfusion behaviour. Br J Health Psychol. 2009;14(4):625–646. doi: 10.1348/135910708X397025.
    1. Carver CS, Scheier MF. On the Self-regulation of Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
    1. Brehaut JC, Graham ID, Wood TJ, Taljaard M, Eagles D, Lott A, Clement C, Kelly AM, Mason S, Stiell IG. Measuring acceptability of clinical decision rules: validation of the Ottawa acceptability of decision rules instrument (OADRI) in four countries. Med Decis Making. 2010;30(3):398–408. doi: 10.1177/0272989X09344747.
    1. Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis J, Hardeman W, Eccles MP, Cane J, Wood CE. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: Building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013;46(1):81–95. doi: 10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6.
    1. Ferlie EB, Shortell SM. Improving the quality of health care in the United Kingdom and the United States: a framework for change. Milbank Q. 2001;79(2):281–315. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.00206.
    1. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M, Medical Research Council G Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655.
    1. Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull. 1971;76(5):378. doi: 10.1037/h0031619.
    1. Fishbein M. A Consideration of Beliefs and their Role in Attitude Measurement. New York: Wiley; 1967.
    1. Francis J, Eccles MP, Johnston M, Walker AE, Grimshaw JM, Foy R, Kaner EFS, Smith L, Bonetti D. Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour. A manual for health services researchers. Newcastle upon Tyne: Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne; 2004.
    1. Doak LG, Doak CC, Meade CD. Strategies to improve cancer education materials. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1996;23(8):1305–1312.
    1. O'Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl J. Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies. BMJ. 2010;341:c4587. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c4587.
    1. Moran-Ellis J, Alexander VD, Cronin A, Dickinson M, Fielding J, Sleney J, Thomas H. Triangulation and integration: processes, claims and implications. Qual Res. 2006;6(1):45–59. doi: 10.1177/1468794106058870.
    1. Bellg AJ, Borrelli B, Resnick B, Hecht J, Minicucci DS, Ory M, Ogedegbe G, Orwig D, Ernst D, Czajkowski S. Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: best practices and recommendations from the NIH Behavior Change Consortium. Health Psychol. 2004;23(5):443. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.23.5.443.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅