Process Evaluation of the Implementation of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions Tool in Dutch Primary Care - Lessons from a Qualitative Implementation Study

Overview

Journal BMC Health Serv Res

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Health Services

Date 2024 Jul 20

PMID 39033106

Authors

Danny Claessens

Marcia Vervloet

Esther A Boudewijns

Lotte C E M Keijsers

Annerika H M Gidding-Slok

Onno C P van Schayck

Bjorn Winkens

Liset van Dijk

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC-)tool is developed to facilitate a personalized approach to care in the patient-healthcare provider (HCP) conversation based on shared decision-making and individualized care plans. An effectiveness study highlighted its effect on the perceived quality of care and patient activation. Successful implementation of novel interventions necessitates an understanding of the user's actual application, user experiences and an evaluation of implementation outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the ABCC-tool by HCPs in Dutch primary care.

Methods: This study is the process evaluation of a larger type 1 effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial. Semi-structured interviews with HCPs, who were interventionists in the hybrid trial, were held at three and twelve months after they started using the ABCC-tool. The Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate implementation outcomes. The Implementation domain was further strengthened with an evaluation of implementation fidelity using Carroll's framework. Inductive coding and thematic analysis were applied to identify relevant participant experiences and implementation outcomes within the RE-AIM framework.

Results: Seventeen HCPs (1 general practitioner, 16 practice nurses) participated in the study, representing 39% of potentially eligible participants. Most HCPs applied the tool after finishing their own routines instead of how it is intended to be used, namely from the beginning of the consultation. HCPs reached 2-6 patients. The ABCC-tool was initially adopted, but twelve HCPs stopped using the tool due to COVID-19 related cancellation of consultations. High fidelity was found for applying the questionnaire and visualization. Low fidelity was present for applying shared decision-making, formulating care goals and monitoring progress. HCPs indicated that maintaning the ABCC-tool depended on accompanying training and implementation support.

Conclusions: HCPs applied the ABCC-tool critically different from intended, potentially diminishing its benefits and ease of use. This evaluation stresses the need for a tailored implementation plan that includes more detailed training and guidance on how and when to use the ABCC-tool.

Citing Articles

Process evaluation of the implementation of the assessment of burden of chronic conditions tool in Dutch primary care - lessons from a qualitative implementation study.

Claessens D, Vervloet M, Boudewijns E, Keijsers L, Gidding-Slok A, van Schayck O BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24(1):827.

PMID: 39033106 PMC: 11264986. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-11270-y.

References

Baker R, Camosso-Stefinovic J, Gillies C, Shaw E, Cheater F, Flottorp S . Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; (4):CD005470. PMC: 7271646. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005470.pub3. View

Boudewijns E, Claessens D, Joore M, Keijsers L, van Schayck O, Winkens B . Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool in patients with COPD, asthma, diabetes mellitus type 2 and heart failure: protocol for a pragmatic clustered quasi-experimental study. BMJ Open. 2020; 10(11):e037693. PMC: 7674093. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037693. View

van Leersum C, Moser A, van Steenkiste B, Wolf J, van der Weijden T . Clients and professionals elicit long-term care preferences by using 'What matters to me': A process evaluation in the Netherlands. Health Soc Care Community. 2021; 30(4):e1037-e1047. PMC: 9291068. DOI: 10.1111/hsc.13509. View

Tsiachristas A, Dikkers C, Boland M, Molken M . Exploring payment schemes used to promote integrated chronic care in Europe. Health Policy. 2013; 113(3):296-304. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.07.007. View

Hogervorst S, Adriaanse M, Brandt H, Vervloet M, van Dijk L, Hugtenburg J . Feasibility study of a digitalized nurse practitioner-led intervention to improve medication adherence in type 2 diabetes patients in Dutch primary care. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2021; 7(1):152. PMC: 8349070. DOI: 10.1186/s40814-021-00892-2. View

Carroll C, Patterson M, Wood S, Booth A, Rick J, Balain S . A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implement Sci. 2007; 2:40. PMC: 2213686. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-2-40. View

Nilsen P, Bernhardsson S . Context matters in implementation science: a scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19(1):189. PMC: 6432749. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4015-3. View

Vainauskiene V, Vaitkiene R . Enablers of Patient Knowledge Empowerment for Self-Management of Chronic Disease: An Integrative Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(5). PMC: 7956493. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18052247. View

Beentjes T, van Gaal B, Vermeulen H, Nijhuis-van Der Sanden M, Goossens P . A Blended Electronic Illness Management and Recovery Program for People With Severe Mental Illness: Qualitative Process Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Ment Health. 2021; 8(1):e20860. PMC: 7857951. DOI: 10.2196/20860. View

10.

Alpay L, Blanson Henkemans O, Otten W, Rovekamp T, Dumay A . E-health applications and services for patient empowerment: directions for best practices in The Netherlands. Telemed J E Health. 2010; 16(7):787-91. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2009.0156. View

11.

Claessens D, Vervloet M, Boudewijns E, Keijsers L, Gidding-Slok A, van Schayck O . Understanding the healthcare providers' perspective for bringing the assessment of burden of chronic conditions tool to practice: a protocol for an implementation study. BMJ Open. 2023; 13(3):e068603. PMC: 9990614. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068603. View

12.

Forman J, Heisler M, Damschroder L, Kaselitz E, Kerr E . Development and application of the RE-AIM QuEST mixed methods framework for program evaluation. Prev Med Rep. 2017; 6:322-328. PMC: 5402634. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.04.002. View

13.

Slok A, Twellaar M, Jutbo L, Kotz D, Chavannes N, Holverda S . 'To use or not to use': a qualitative study to evaluate experiences of healthcare providers and patients with the assessment of burden of COPD (ABC) tool. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2016; 26:16074. PMC: 5113148. DOI: 10.1038/npjpcrm.2016.74. View

14.

Glasgow R, Harden S, Gaglio B, Rabin B, Smith M, Porter G . RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: Adapting to New Science and Practice With a 20-Year Review. Front Public Health. 2019; 7:64. PMC: 6450067. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064. View

15.

Powell B, Beidas R, Lewis C, Aarons G, McMillen J, Proctor E . Methods to Improve the Selection and Tailoring of Implementation Strategies. J Behav Health Serv Res. 2015; 44(2):177-194. PMC: 4761530. DOI: 10.1007/s11414-015-9475-6. View

16.

Slok A, In t Veen J, Chavannes N, van der Molen T, Molken M, Kerstjens H . Development of the Assessment of Burden of COPD tool: an integrated tool to measure the burden of COPD. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2014; 24:14021. PMC: 4498164. DOI: 10.1038/npjpcrm.2014.21. View

17.

Nilsen P . Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015; 10:53. PMC: 4406164. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0. View

18.

Boudewijns E, Claessens D, van Schayck O, Twellaar M, Winkens B, Joore M . Effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC)-tool in patients with asthma, COPD, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and heart failure: A pragmatic clustered quasi-experimental study in the Netherlands. Eur J Gen Pract. 2024; 30(1):2343364. PMC: 11104697. DOI: 10.1080/13814788.2024.2343364. View

19.

Bauer M, Kirchner J . Implementation science: What is it and why should I care?. Psychiatry Res. 2019; 283:112376. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2019.04.025. View

20.

Voorhaar M, van Schayck O, Winkens B, Muris J, Slok A . It Is Smart to Set Treatment Goals, But Are Set Treatment Goals SMART? A Qualitative Assessment of Goals Described in the Assessment of the Burden of COPD Tool. COPD. 2024; 20(1):357-362. DOI: 10.1080/15412555.2023.2289908. View