Shifting accountability:a longitudinal qualitative study of diabetes causation accounts

We undertook a longitudinal qualitative study involving of 20 patients from Scotland who had type 2 diabetes. We looked at their perceptions and understandings of why they had developed diabetes and how, and why, their causation accounts had changed or remained stable over time. Respondents, all of whom were white, were interviewed four times over a 4-year period (at baseline, 6, 12 and 48 months). Their causation accounts often shifted, sometimes subtly, sometimes radically, over the 4 years. The experiential dimensions of living with, observing, and managing their disease over time were central to understanding the continuities and changes we observed. We also highlight how, through a process of removing, adding and/or de-emphasising explanatory factors, causation accounts could be used as “resources” to justify or enable present treatment choices. We use our work to support critiques of social cognition theories, with their emphasis upon beliefs being antecedent to behaviours. We also provide reflections upon the implications of our findings for qualitative research designs and sampling strategies.

The experiences of con sultations on oral anticoagula-tion for AF:the importance of qualitative research incardiovascular sciences

Objectives: Multiple-perspective qualitative designs can aid researchersto develop a more multifaceted account of a phenomenon and as aform of triangulation of data. Two interlinking studies aimed toexplore patients’ and physicians’ experiences of atrial fibrillation (AF)and warfarin.Methods: Audio-recorded semistructured individual interviews wereused. Study 1: Three AF patient subgroups were interviewed (n = 11);accepted, refused, or discontinued warfarin. Study 2: Four physiciansubgroups (n = 16): consultant cardiologists, consultant general physi-cians, general practitioners, and cardiology registrars. Data was ana-lyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis, a qualitativemethodology.Results: Study 1: Three overarching themes comprised patients’ experi-ences: the initial consultation, life after the consultation, and patients’reflections. Patients commented on the reassurance experienced duringthe consultation, but they perceived the decision-making processmostly led by the physician. Lack of education and take-home materi-als during the initial consultation were highlighted. Patients’ uptake ofinformation was influenced by past experiences and knowledge ofstroke and/or bleeding. Study 2: Two overarching themes covered phy-sicians’ experiences: communicating information and challenges withwarfarin prescription for AF. Physicians’ approach to the consultationstyle shifted through a continuum of compliance-adherence-concor-dance during the consultation. Time and the perceived patient trust inthem as the expert led to physicians to adopt a paternalistic approach.Guideline adherence and the need to adopt a multidisciplinaryapproach were pointed out as current challenges.Conclusion: There is a need to target patients’ and physicians’ abilityto communicate with each other in a comprehensible way. This projecthas illustrated the benefit of using a qualitative approach to under-stand the lived experience of the physician–patient consultation.Disclosure of Interest: None declare

Perceptions and experiences of the implementation, management, use and optimisation of electronic prescribing systems in hospital settings:protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies

Introduction: There is increasing evidence that electronic prescribing (ePrescribing) or computerised provider/physician order entry (CPOE) systems can improve the quality and safety of healthcare services. However, it has also become clear that their implementation is not straightforward and may create unintended or undesired consequences once in use. In this context, qualitative approaches have been particularly useful and their interpretative synthesis could make an important and timely contribution to the field. This review will aim to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies on ePrescribing/CPOE in hospital settings, with or without clinical decision support. Methods and analysis: Data sources will include the following bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In Process, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, The Cochrane Library (CDSR, DARE and CENTRAL databases), Nursing and Allied Health Sources, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts via ProQuest and SCOPUS. In addition, other sources will be searched for ongoing studies (ClinicalTrials.gov) and grey literature: Healthcare Management Information Consortium, Conference Proceedings Citation Index (Web of Science) and Sociological abstracts. Studies will be independently screened for eligibility by 2 reviewers. Qualitative studies, either standalone or in the context of mixed-methods designs, reporting the perspectives of any actors involved in the implementation, management and use of ePrescribing/CPOE systems in hospital-based care settings will be included. Data extraction will be conducted by 2 reviewers using a piloted form. Quality appraisal will be based on criteria from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Studies will not be excluded based on quality assessment. A postsynthesis sensitivity analysis will be undertaken. Data analysis will follow the thematic synthesis method. Ethics and dissemination: The study does not require ethical approval as primary data will not be collected. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.