Umeå University's logo

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.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2281-4622
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3025-2690
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: BMC Health Services Research, 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 (BMC), 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 Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-141002DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3023-zISI: 000428883500004PubMedID: 29606110Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85044669581OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-141002DiVA, id: diva2:1150922
Note

Originally included in thesis in manuscript form with title: "Implementation of clinical guidelines on lifestyle in primary health care - a two-year follow up". 

Available from: 2017-10-20 Created: 2017-10-20 Last updated: 2023-07-11Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Strengthening lifestyle interventions in primary health care: the challenge of change and implementation of guidelines in clinical practice
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Strengthening lifestyle interventions in primary health care: the challenge of change and implementation of guidelines in clinical practice
2017 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Alternative title[sv]
Stärka arbetet med levnadsvanor i primärvården : utmaningen att förändra och att introducera riktlinjer i klinisk praxis
Abstract [en]

Background: Lifestyle habits like tobacco use, hazardous use of alcohol, unhealthy eating habits and insufficient physical activity are risk factors for developing non-communicable diseases, which are the leading, global causes of death. Furthermore, ill health and chronic diseases are costly and put an increased burden on societies and health systems.  In order to address this situation, governmental bodies and organizations’ have encouraged healthcare providers to reorient the focus of healthcare and undertake effective interventions that support patients to engage in healthy lifestyle habits. In Sweden, national clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on lifestyle interventions were released in 2011. However, the challenges of changing clinical practice and introducing guidelines are well documented, and health interventions face particular difficulties. The overall purpose of this thesis is to contribute towards a better understanding of the complexities of shifting primary health care to become more health oriented, and to explore the implementation environment and its effect on lifestyle intervention CPGs. The specific aims are to investigate how implementation challenges were addressed during the guideline development process (Study I), to investigate several dimensions of readiness for implementing lifestyle intervention guidelines, including aspects of the intervention and the intervention context (Study II), to explore the extent to which health care professionals are working with lifestyle interventions in primary health care, and to describe and develop a baseline measure of professional knowledge, attitudes and perceived organizational support for lifestyle interventions (Study III), and to assess the progress of implementing lifestyle interventions in primary care settings, as  well as investigate the uptake and usage of the CPGs in clinical practice (Study IV).

 

Methods and results: Interviews were conducted with national guideline-developers (n=7). They were aware of numerous implementation challenges, and applied strategies and ways to address them during the guideline development process. The strategies adhered to four themes: (a) broad agreements and consensus about scope and purpose, (b) systematic and active involvement of stakeholders, (c) formalized and structured development procedures, and (d) openness and transparent development procedures. At the same time, the CPGs for lifestyle interventions challenged the development-model at the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) because of their preventive and non-disease specific focus (I).

A multiple case study was also conducted, using a mixed methods approach to gather data from key organizational individuals that were accountable for planning the implementation of CPGs (n=10), as well as health professionals and managers (n=340). Analysis of this data revealed that conditions for change were favorable in the two organizations that served as case studies, especially concerning change focus (health orientation) and the specific intervention (national guidelines on lifestyle interventions). Somewhat limited support was found for change and learning, and change format (national guidelines in general). Furthermore, factors in the outer context were found to influence the priority and timing of the intervention, as well as considerable inconsistencies across the professional groups (II). A cross-sectional study among physicians and nurses (n=315) in Swedish primary healthcare showed that healthcare professionals have a largely positive attitude and thorough overall knowledge of lifestyle intervention methods. However, both the level of knowledge and the involvement in patients’ lifestyle change, differed between professional groups. Organizational support like CPGs and the development of primary health care (PHC) collaborations with other stakeholders were identified as potential strategies for enhancing the implementation of lifestyle interventions in PHC (III).

In addition to interviews and case studies, a longitudinal survey among health professionals (n=150; n=73) demonstrated that their use of methods to encourage patients to reduce or eliminate tobacco or alcohol use, had increased. The survey also indicated that nurses had increased the extent to which they addressed all four lifestyle habits. The progress of the implementation of CPGs on lifestyle interventions in PHC was somewhat limited, and important differences in physicians and nurses’ attitudes, as well as their use of the guidelines, were found (IV).

Conclusions: Health orientation differs in many ways from more traditional fields in medicine. To strengthen the implementation of this very important (but not “urgent”) field in health care, it needs, first of all, to be prioritized at all levels! The results of the studies demonstrate relatively slow adoption of lifestyle intervention CPGs in clinical practice, and indicate room for improvement. The findings of this thesis can inform healthcare policy and research on further development of the health orientation perspective, as well as on the challenges of implementing CPGs on lifestyle interventions in primary care. In summary, this thesis presents important lessons learned regarding health orientation - from the development of CPGs in the field, via assessing healthcare organizations’ readiness to change and health professionals’ attitudes to methods to support patients with lifestyle changes.

Abstract [sv]

Bakgrund: Levnadsvanor som tobaksbruk, riskbruk av alkohol, ohälsosamma matvanor och otillräcklig fysisk aktivitet är riskfaktorer för att utveckla kroniska sjukdomar, vilka orsakar de flesta dödsfallen i världen. Ohälsa och dess följdsjukdomar utmanar också samhällen och hälsosystem världen över p.g.a. de höga kostnader som de medför. För att förbättra situationen så försöker regeringar och organisationer förändra hälso- och sjukvårdens perspektiv till att fokusera mer på hälsa och att arbeta med effektiva interventioner för att förebygga och att förändra människors ohälsosamma vanor. År 2011 i Sverige, publicerades nationella kliniska riktlinjer för vårdens arbete med att förebygga sjukdom genom att stödja förändring av patienters ohälsosamma levnadsvanor. Det är dock välkänt hur svårt det är att förändra klinisk praxis och att introducera riktlinjer, och interventioner på området hälsa i sjukvården brottas med specifika utmaningar. Det övergripande syftet med den här avhandlingen har varit att bidra till en bättre förståelse av komplexiteten i att hälsoorientera primärvården, och att utforska förutsättningarna till att implementera kliniska riktlinjer för att stödja förändring av patienters levnadsvanor. De mer specifika syftena var: att (I) utforska hur implementeringsutmaningarna behandlades i utvecklingsprocessen av riktlinjerna ; att (II) undersöka dimensioner av beredskapen för förändring i primärvården för att implementera riktlinjerna om levnadsvanor inkluderande aspekter av interventionen själv samt kontexten ; att (III) utforska i vilken utsträckning hälsoprofessionerna arbetar med levnadsvanor i primärvården, och att beskriva deras kunskap, attityder och uppfattat organisatoriskt stöd för livsstilsinterventioner ; att (IV) i en två-årig uppföljning utvärdera utvecklingen av arbetet med levnadsvanor i primärvården, och användningen av de specifika nationella riktlinjerna för levnadsvanor.

Metod och resultat: En intervjustudie med riktlinjeutvecklare på nationell nivå (n = 7) visade att många utmaningar för implementeringen av riktlinjerna identifierades och bemöttes under utvecklingsprocessen i fyra teman av strategier: breda överenskommelser och konsensus om inriktning och syfte, systematiskt och aktivt inkluderande av stakeholders, formaliserad och strukturerad utvecklingsprocess, öppenhet och insyn utvecklingsprocess. Samtidigt utmanade dock riktlinjerna om livsstilsinterventioner Socialstyrelsens utvecklingmodell p.g.a. deras förebyggande och icke sjukdomsspecifika fokus (I). En multipel fallstudie med nyckelpersoner ansvariga för implementeringen av riktlinjerna i sjukvårdsorganisationerna (n = 10) samt vårdpersonal och chefer (n = 340), visade på gynnsamma villkor för förändring i båda organisationerna rörande förändringsfokus (d.v.s. hälsoorientering) och den specifika interventionen (d.v.s. riktlinjer om metoder för att stödja förändring av ohälsosamma levnadsvanor). Stödet för förändring och lärande visade på något svagare resultat, likaså formen för förändringen d.v.s. nationella riktlinjer i allmänhet. Faktorer i den yttre kontexten visade sig kunna påverka prioritering av och optimalt val av tidpunkt för interventionen, likaså betydande skillnader i uppfattningar mellan yrkesgrupperna (II). En tvärsnittsstudie bland läkare och sjuksköterskor (n = 315) i primärvården visade att de har en positiv attityd och en god kunskapsnivå om metoder för livsstilsförändring. Både kunskapsnivå och i vilken utsträckning man arbetar med patienters livsstil skiljer sig mellan yrkesgrupper. Organisatoriskt stöd som nationella riktlinjer och utvecklandet av primärvårdens samarbete med intressenter i närområdet identifierades som viktigt för att förbättra arbetet med livsstil interventioner (III). En longitudinell undersökning bland vårdpersonal visade att användning av metoder för att förändra patientens vanor beträffande tobaksbruk och riskbruk av alkohol har ökat över tid, och att sjuksköterskorna arbetar i högre utsträckning med alla fyra levnadsvanorna än i tidigare. Implementeringen av de nationella riktlinjerna för levnadsvanor hade inte kommit så långt vid det andra mättillfället, och stora skillnader visade sig i hur läkare och sköterskor ser på riktlinjer och i vilken utsträckning de använder dem (IV).

Slutsats: Hälsofrämjande och prevention skiljer sig på många sätt från mer traditionella fält inom medicinen. För att stärka implementeringen av det här viktiga (men ej akuta) fältet i hälso- och sjukvården, så måste det först av allt prioriteras på alla nivåer! Resultatet visar på ett svagt upptag av riktlinjerna för livsstilsinterventioner i klinisk praxis, och lämnar utrymme till förbättring. Aspekter av resultatet som presenteras i avhandlingen kan vägleda fortsatt utveckling och implementering av hälsoorientering och riktlinjer för livsstilsinterventioner inom primärvården, samt användas för att påverka policy, praxis och framtida forskning. Det gäller framför allt aspekter av utveckling av nationella riktlinjer på området; hälso- och sjukvårdsorganisationernas beredskap till förändring; hälsoprofessionernas attityder, kunskap och i vilken utsträckning de arbetar med livsstilsinterventioner och riktlinjer.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå Universitet, 2017. p. 91+4
Series
Umeå University medical dissertations, ISSN 0346-6612 ; 1926
Keywords
Health orientation, health promotion, prevention, primary health care, readiness for change, lifestyles, clinical practice guidelines, implementation, guideline development, tobacco use, alcohol use, unhealthy eating habits, physical activity, organizational support
National Category
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology
Research subject
Public health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-141323 (URN)978-91-7601-789-0 (ISBN)
Public defence
2017-11-24, Sal 135, Allmänmedicin, By 9A, Norrlands universitetssjukhus, 90187 Umeå, Umeå, 09:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2017-11-02 Created: 2017-10-30 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(682 kB)125 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 682 kBChecksum SHA-512
ba8eceec513e5655df6024d1a979948774e859ef33e0900ef9c55b8448a58a1a437e319ec9849e923f81d516be3e1043d730f26a92435d8f76aebdf9424691d1
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Kardakis, ThereseJerdén, LarsNyström, MonicaWeinehall, LarsJohansson, Helene

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kardakis, ThereseJerdén, LarsNyström, MonicaWeinehall, LarsJohansson, Helene
By organisation
Epidemiology and Global Health
In the same journal
BMC Health Services Research
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and EpidemiologyHealth Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 126 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: 406 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