umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Implementation of clinical practice guidelines on lifestyle interventions in Swedish primary healthcare: a two-year follow up
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health. Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Medical Management Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health. Center for Clinical Research Dalarna, Falun, Sweden; School of Education, Health and Social Studies, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health. Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Medical Management Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health.
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: BMC Health Services Research, ISSN 1472-6963, E-ISSN 1472-6963, Vol. 18, article id 227Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Implementation of interventions concerning prevention and health promotion in health care has faced particular challenges resulting in a low frequency and quality of these services. In November 2011, the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare released national clinical practice guidelines to counteract patients' unhealthy lifestyle habits. Drawing on the results of a previous study as a point of departure, the aim of this two-year follow up was to assess the progress of work with lifestyle interventions in primary healthcare as well as the uptake and usage of the new guidelines on lifestyle interventions in clinical practice. Methods: Longitudinal study among health professionals with survey at baseline and 2 years later. Development over time and differences between professional groups were calculated with Pearson chi-square test. Results: Eighteen percent of the physicians reported to use the clinical practice guidelines, compared to 58% of the nurses. Nurses were also more likely to consider them as a support in their work than physicians did. Over time, health professionals usage of methods to change patients' tobacco habits and hazardous use of alcohol had increased, and the nurses worked to a higher extent than before with all four lifestyles. Knowledge on methods for lifestyle change was generally high; however, there was room for improvement concerning methods on alcohol, unhealthy eating and counselling. Forty-one percent reported to possess thorough knowledge of counselling skills. Conclusions: Even if the uptake and usage of the CPGs on lifestyle interventions so far is low, the participants reported more frequent counselling on patients' lifestyle changes concerning use of tobacco and hazardous use of alcohol. However, these findings should be evaluated acknowledging the possibility of selection bias in favour of health promotion and lifestyle guidance, and the loss of one study site in the follow up. Furthermore, this study indicates important differences in physicians and nurses' attitudes to and use of the guidelines, where the nurses reported working to a higher extent with all four lifestyles compared to the first study. These findings suggest further investigations on the implementation process in clinical practice, and the physicians' uptake and use of the CPGs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central, 2018. Vol. 18, article id 227
Keywords [en]
Implementation, Lifestyle, Clinical practice guidelines, Primary health care, Preventive health services, alth promotion, Smoking, Counselling
National Category
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-147310DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3023-zISI: 000428883500004PubMedID: 29606110OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-147310DiVA, id: diva2:1210155
Available from: 2018-05-25 Created: 2018-05-25 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1387 kB)10 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1387 kBChecksum SHA-512
1789e677313338dbde9f22f8c0a1e8e7828f6c42946590a22c4cb313b17816587c7bb4d946bbaa06852e314c926e0c77290f77377ddd6d0b0aa5424437c14701
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Kardakis, ThereseJerdén, LarsNyström, Monica E.Weinehall, LarsJohansson, Helene

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kardakis, ThereseJerdén, LarsNyström, Monica E.Weinehall, LarsJohansson, Helene
By organisation
Epidemiology and Global Health
In the same journal
BMC Health Services Research
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 10 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 52 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf