Objective: Effective healthcare innovations are often not adopted and implemented. An implementation strategy based on facilitators and barriers for use as perceived by healthcare professionals could increase adoption rates. This study therefore aimed to identify the most relevant facilitators and barriers for use of an innovative breast cancer aftercare decision aid (PtDA) in healthcare practice. Methods: Facilitators and barriers (related to the PtDA, adopter and healthcare organisation) were assessed among breast cancer aftercare health professionals (n = 81), using the MIDI questionnaire. For each category, a backward regression analysis was performed (dependent = intention to adopt). All significant factors were then added to a final regression analysis to identify to most relevant determinants of PtDA adoption. Results: Expecting higher compatibility with daily practice and clinical guidelines, more positive outcomes of use, higher perceived relevance for the patient and increased self-efficacy were significantly associated with a higher intention to adopt. Self-efficacy and perceived patient relevance remained significant in the final model. Conclusions: Low perceived self-efficacy and patient relevance are the most important barriers for health professions to adopt a breast cancer aftercare PtDA. Practice implications: To target self-efficacy and perceived patient relevance, the implementation strategy could apply health professional peer champions.
Objective: To describe the development of a goal-directed movement intervention in two medical wards, including recommendations for implementation and evaluation. Design: Implementation Research. Setting: Pulmonology and nephrology/gastroenterology wards of the University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands. Participants: Seven focus groups were executed including 28 nurses, 7 physical therapists and 15 medical specialists. Patients' perceptions were repeatedly assessed during the iterative steps of the intervention development. Intervention: Interventions were targeted to each ward's specific character, following an Intervention Mapping approach using literature and research meetings. Main measures: Intervention components were linked to Behavior Change Techniques and implementation strategies will be selected using the Expert Recommendation Implementing Change tool. Evaluation outcomes like number of patients using the movement intervention will be measured, based on the taxonomy of Proctor. Results: The developed intervention consists of: insight in patients movement behavior (monitoring & feedback), goal setting (goals & planning) and adjustments to the environment (associations & antecedents). The following implementation strategies are recommended: to conduct educational meetings, prepare & identify champions and audit & provide feedback. To measure service and client outcomes, the mean level of physical activity per ward can be evaluated and the Net Promoter Score can be used. Conclusion(s): This study shows the development of a goal-directed movement intervention aligned with the needs of healthcare professionals. This resulted in an intervention consisting of feedback & monitoring of movement behavior, goal setting and adjustments in the environment. Using a step-by-step iterative implementation model to guide development and implementation is recommended.
