Development of a Complex Intervention for Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Primary Care Using the UK Medical Research Council Framework

Objective: To apply the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for development and evaluation of trials of complex interventions to a primary healthcare intervention to promote secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Study Design: Case report of intervention development. Methods: First, literature relating to secondary prevention and lifestyle change was reviewed. Second, a preliminary intervention was modeled, based on literature findings and focus group interviews with patients (n = 23) and staff (n = 29) from 4 general practices. Participants’ experiences of and attitudes toward key intervention components were explored. Third, the preliminary intervention was pilot-tested in 4 general practices. After delivery of the pilot intervention, practitioners evaluated the training sessions, and qualitative data relating to experiences of the intervention were collected using semistructured interviews with staff (n = 10) and patient focus groups (n = 17). Results: Literature review identified 3 intervention components: a structured recall system, practitioner training, and patient information. Initial qualitative data identified variations in recall system design, training requirements (medication prescribing, facilitating behavior change), and information appropriate to the prospective study participants. Identifying detailed structures within intervention components clarified how the intervention could be tailored to individual practice, practitioner, and patient needs while preserving the theoretical functions of the components. Findings from the pilot phase informed further modeling of the intervention, reducing administrative time, increasing practical content of training, and omitting unhelpful patient information. Conclusion: Application of the MRC framework helped to determine the feasibility and development of a complex intervention for primary care research.

On the Problems of Mixing RCTs with Qualitative Research: The Case of the MRC Framework for the Evaluation of Complex Healthcare Interventions

In the perceived hierarchy of research designs, the results from randomized controlled trials are considered to provide the highest level of evidence. Indeed these trials have been upheld as the gold standard in research. The benefits and limitations of the randomized controlled trial as a method of evaluating the effectiveness of healthcare interventions are presented. The article then examines the different levels of complexity within healthcare interventions and the problems this poses in determining effectiveness. In an effort to provide a solution to this problem, the Medical Research Council produced a framework to assist investigators to develop and evaluate complex healthcare interventions. The framework is described with reference to an example of implementing and evaluating protocols for weaning patients in the intensive care unit. The framework is critiqued on the basis that it involves an ambiguous or contradictory ontology, which fails to articulate the relationship between the positivism of randomized controlled trials with the relativism of qualitative approaches. It is concluded that the use of realist strategies in combination with randomized controlled trials provides the most coherent solution to this quandary

How Prepared are UK Medical Graduates for Practice? Final report from a programme of research commissioned by the General Medical Council

This programme of research aimed to understand the extent to which current UK medical graduates are prepared for practice. Commissioned by the General Medical Council, we conducted: (1) A Rapid Review of the literature between 2009 and 2013; (2) narrative interviews with a range of stakeholders; and (3) longitudinal audio-diaries with Foundation Year 1 doctors. The Rapid Review (RR) resulted in data from 81 manuscripts being extracted and mapped against a coding framework (including outcomes from Tomorrow's Doctors (2009) (TD09)). A narrative synthesis of the data was undertaken. Narrative interviews were conducted with 185 participants from 8 stakeholder groups: F1 trainees, newly registered trainee doctors, clinical educators, undergraduate and postgraduate deans and foundation programme directors, other healthcare professionals, employers, policy and government and patient and public representatives. Longitudinal audio-diaries were recorded by 26 F1 trainees over 4 months. The data were analysed thematically and mapped against TD09. Together these data shed light onto how preparedness for practice is conceptualised, measured, how prepared UK medical graduates are for practice, the effectiveness of transition interventions and the currently debated issue of bringing full registration forward to align with medical students’ graduation. Preparedness for practice was conceptualised as both a long- and short-term venture that included personal readiness as well as knowledge, skills and attitudes. It has mainly been researched using self-report measures of generalised incidents that have been shown to be problematic. In terms of transition interventions: assistantships were found to be valuable and efficacious for proactive students as team members, shadowing is effective when undertaken close to employment/setting of F1 post and induction is generally effective but of inconsistent quality. The August transition was highlighted in our interview and audio-diary data where F1s felt unprepared, particularly for the step-change in responsibility, workload, degree of multitasking and understanding where to go for help. Evidence of preparedness for specific tasks, skills and knowledge was contradictory: trainees are well prepared for some practical procedures but not others, reasonably well prepared for history taking and full physical examinations, but mostly unprepared for adopting an holistic understanding of the patient, involving patients in their care, safe and legal prescribing, diagnosing and managing complex clinical conditions and providing immediate care in medical emergencies. Evidence for preparedness for interactional and interpersonal aspects of practice was inconsistent with some studies in the RR suggesting graduates were prepared for team working and communicating with colleagues and patients, but other studies contradicting this. Interview and audio-diary data highlights concerns around F1s preparedness for communicating with angry or upset patients and relatives, breaking bad news, communicating with the wider team (including interprofessionally) and handover communication. There was some evidence in the RR to suggest that graduates were unprepared for dealing with error and safety incidents and lack an understanding of how the clinical environment works. Interview and audio-diary data backs this up, adding that F1s are also unprepared for understanding financial aspects of healthcare. In terms of being personally prepared, RR, interview and audio diary evidence is mixed around graduates’ preparedness for identifying their own limitations, but all data points to graduates’ difficulties in the domain of time management. In terms of personal and situational demographic factors, the RR found that gender did not typically predict perceptions of preparedness, but graduates from more recent cohorts, graduate entry students, graduates from problem based learning courses, UK educated graduates and graduates with an integrated degree reported feeling better prepared. The longitudinal audio-diaries provided insights into the preparedness journey for F1s. There seems to be a general development in the direction of trainees feeling more confident and competent as they gain more experience. However, these developments were not necessarily linear as challenging circumstances (e.g. new specialty, new colleagues, lack of staffing) sometimes made them feel unprepared for situations where they had previously indicated preparedness.

Interprofessional Healthcare Collaboration on the Front Lines: A Qualitative Exploration of the Facilitators and Barriers to Effective Collaboration in Qatar.

Background:
Healthcare in Qatar is undergoing a period of major reform, driven by a strong economy and vision for a world-class healthcare system. One area identified as a potential contributor to developing a world-class healthcare system is interprofessional education (IPE), with the goal of facilitating healthcare workers to work together collaboratively. Several key steps have been taken towards developing IPE in Qatar, such as the formation of the Qatar Interprofessional Health Council (QIHC), the development of an IPE program for undergraduate healthcare students, the development of a set of shared core competencies, the receipt of substantial buy-in from leaders across the healthcare system, and recent approval of funding to develop a post-licensure healthcare IPE program. In order to improve IPE in Qatar, it is important to better understand the facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration in Qatar. This study seeks to do so by qualitatively exploring facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration for healthcare professional in Qatar from the perspective of health care professionals. By better understanding how health care workers give meaning to interprofessional education and collaboration, this research can assist in improving interprofessional activities in healthcare in Qatar.

Objectives
The purpose of this paper-presentation is to report on finding from a qualitative study that explored different facilitators and barriers of interprofessional practice in Qatar.

Method:
Ten healthcare professionals who work in Qatar were interviewed using semi-structured, open-ended interviews. Interview questions were organized by phenomenological (e.g. exploring the lived-experiences of healthcare workers) and ethnographic interviewing techniques (e.g. focusing on what people do). The questions explored the barriers, facilitators, and what is working well in terms of interprofessional practice for health care professional in Qatar.

Findings and Implications:
Different factors associated with interprofessional collaborations will be discussed. In doing so, this research adds to the literature on IPE by shedding light on interprofessional collaboration and education in the Middle East. Furthermore, this study identifies barriers for health care workers to work collaboratively in health care settings in Qatar. Addressing such barriers, and building off of what is working well, will facilitate Qatar in reaching one of the Vision 2030 goals of improving Qatar’s health and wellness.

Interprofessional Healthcare Collaboration on the Front Lines: A Qualitative Exploration of the Facilitators and Barriers to Effective Collaboration in Qatar.

Background:

Healthcare in Qatar is undergoing a period of major reform, driven by a strong economy and vision for a world-class healthcare system. One area identified as a potential contributor to developing a world-class healthcare system is interprofessional education (IPE), with the goal of facilitating healthcare workers to work together collaboratively. Several key steps have been taken towards developing IPE in Qatar, such as the formation of the Qatar Interprofessional Health Council (QIHC), the development of an IPE program for undergraduate healthcare students, the development of a set of shared core competencies, the receipt of substantial buy-in from leaders across the healthcare system, and recent approval of funding to develop a post-licensure healthcare IPE program. In order to improve IPE in Qatar, it is important to better understand the facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration in Qatar. This study seeks to do so by qualitatively exploring facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration for healthcare professional in Qatar from the perspective of health care professionals. By better understanding how health care workers give meaning to interprofessional education and collaboration, this research can assist in improving interprofessional activities in healthcare in Qatar.

Objectives

The purpose of this paper-presentation is to report on finding from a qualitative study that explored different facilitators and barriers of interprofessional practice in Qatar.

Method:

Ten healthcare professionals who work in Qatar were interviewed using semi-structured, open-ended interviews. Interview questions were organized by phenomenological (e.g. exploring the lived-experiences of healthcare workers) and ethnographic interviewing techniques (e.g. focusing on what people do). The questions explored the barriers, facilitators, and what is working well in terms of interprofessional practice for health care professional in Qatar.

Findings and Implications:

Different factors associated with interprofessional collaborations will be discussed. In doing so, this research adds to the literature on IPE by shedding light on interprofessional collaboration and education in the Middle East. Furthermore, this study identifies barriers for health care workers to work collaboratively in health care settings in Qatar. Addressing such barriers, and building off of what is working well, will facilitate Qatar in reaching one of the Vision 2030 goals of improving Qatar’s health and wellness.

Modelo de predicción electoral: el caso de la elección municipal 2015 de León de los Aldama, Guanajuato

El artículo analiza los cambios político electorales en León, Guanajuato, a partir de cómo se fue configurando el desplazamiento del Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) por el Partido Acción Nacional (PAN) en este ayuntamiento en el año 1988, hasta el cambio de correlación de fuerzas en el año 2012. Ello da pauta para analizar los escenarios que podrían caracterizar las próximas elecciones de este año. Con este objetivo se propone un modelo estadístico para dicho estudio: el modelo de regresión Dirichlet, el cual permite considerar la naturaleza de los datos electorales.
The article analyzes the electoral changes in León, Guanajuato, based on how it was setting the displacement of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) by the National Action Party (PAN) in this council in 1988, until the change of correlation forces in 2012, which gives guidelines to analyze the scenarios that could characterize the upcoming elections this year. With this aim the authors proposed a statistical model for the study: the Dirichlet regression model, which allows to consider the nature of electoral data.

The contribution of qualitative research in designing a complex intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in two different healthcare systems

Background: Developing complex interventions for testing in randomised controlled trials is of increasing importance in healthcare planning. There is a need for careful design of interventions for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD). It has been suggested that integrating qualitative research in the development of a complex intervention may contribute to optimising its design but there is limited evidence of this in practice. This study aims to examine the contribution of qualitative research in developing a complex intervention to improve the provision and uptake of secondary prevention of CHD within primary care in two different healthcare systems.

Methods: In four general practices, one rural and one urban, in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, patients with CHD were purposively selected. Four focus groups with patients (N = 23) and four with staff (N = 29) informed the development of the intervention by exploring how it could be tailored and integrated with current secondary prevention activities for CHD in the two healthcare settings. Following an exploratory trial the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention were discussed in four focus groups (17 patients) and 10 interviews (staff). The data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: Integrating qualitative research into the development of the intervention provided depth of information about the varying impact, between the two healthcare systems, of different funding and administrative arrangements, on their provision of secondary prevention and identified similar barriers of time constraints, training needs and poor patient motivation. The findings also highlighted the importance to patients of stress management, the need for which had been underestimated by the researchers. The qualitative evaluation provided depth of detail not found in evaluation questionnaires. It highlighted how the intervention needed to be more practical by minimising administration, integrating role plays into behaviour change training, providing more practical information about stress management and removing self-monitoring of lifestyle change.

Conclusion: Qualitative research is integral to developing the design detail of a complex intervention and tailoring its components to address individuals' needs in different healthcare systems. The findings highlight how qualitative research may be a valuable component of the preparation for complex interventions and their evaluation.