What factors influence community wound care in the UK? A focus group study using the Theoretical Domains Framework
- PMID: 31371284
- PMCID: PMC6678001
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024859
What factors influence community wound care in the UK? A focus group study using the Theoretical Domains Framework
Abstract
Objectives: Research has found unwarranted variation across community wound care services in the North of England, with underuse of evidence-based practice and overuse of interventions where there is little or no known patient benefit. This study explored the factors that influence care in community settings for people with complex wounds, to develop a deeper understanding of the current context of wound care and variation in practice.
Design: Qualitative focus group study using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to structure the questions, prompts and analyses.
Setting: Community healthcare settings in the North of England, UK.
Participants: Forty-six clinical professionals who cared for patients with complex wounds and eight non-clinical professionals who were responsible for procuring wound care products participated across six focus group interviews.
Results: We found the TDF domains: environmental context and resources, knowledge, skills, social influences and behaviour regulation to best explain the variation in wound care and the underuse of research evidence. Factors such as financial pressures were perceived as having a negative effect on the continuity of care, the availability of wound care services and workloads. We found practice to be mainly based on experiential knowledge and personal preference and highly influenced by colleagues, patients and the pharmaceutical industry, although not by research evidence.
Conclusions: Our study provides new insight into the role that experiential learning and social influences play in determining wound care and on the limited influence of research. Workforce pressures and limited resources are perceived to impede care by reducing patient access to services and the ability to provide holistic care. Participative collaboration between university and healthcare organisations may offer a supportive route to addressing issues, implementing sustainable changes to practice and service delivery and a resolute commitment to research use among clinical professionals.
Keywords: focus group; healthcare professional; healthcare quality; qualitative research; theoretical domains framework; wound management.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: None declared.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Opportunities for better value wound care: a multiservice, cross-sectional survey of complex wounds and their care in a UK community population.BMJ Open. 2018 Mar 22;8(3):e019440. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019440. BMJ Open. 2018. PMID: 29572395 Free PMC article.
-
Barriers and enablers to the implementation of evidence-based practice in pressure ulcer prevention and management in an integrated community care setting: A qualitative study informed by the theoretical domains framework.Health Soc Care Community. 2021 May;29(3):766-779. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13322. Epub 2021 Mar 4. Health Soc Care Community. 2021. PMID: 33662173
-
What promotes or prevents greater use of appropriate compression in people with venous leg ulcers? A qualitative interview study with nurses in the north of England using the Theoretical Domains Framework.BMJ Open. 2022 Aug 1;12(8):e061834. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061834. BMJ Open. 2022. PMID: 35914912 Free PMC article.
-
EWMA Document: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy.J Wound Care. 2017 Mar 1;26(Sup3):S1-S154. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.Sup3.S1. J Wound Care. 2017. PMID: 28345371 Review.
-
How can use of the Theoretical Domains Framework be optimized in qualitative research? A rapid systematic review.Br J Health Psychol. 2020 Sep;25(3):677-694. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12437. Epub 2020 Jun 19. Br J Health Psychol. 2020. PMID: 32558289
Cited by
-
Use of antimicrobial dressings in England and the association with published clinical guidance: interrupted time series analysis.BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 17;9(9):e028727. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028727. BMJ Open. 2019. PMID: 31530595 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of home-based chronic wound care training for patients and caregivers: A systematic review.Int Wound J. 2023 Nov;20(9):3802-3820. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14219. Epub 2023 Jun 5. Int Wound J. 2023. PMID: 37277908 Free PMC article.
-
General practitioners' knowledge of leg ulcer treatment in primary healthcare: an interview study.Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2020 Sep 24;21:e34. doi: 10.1017/S1463423620000274. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2020. PMID: 32967749 Free PMC article.
-
Managing the delivery of venous leg ulcer services: A willingness to pay study.Health Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 28;5(4):e715. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.715. eCollection 2022 Jul. Health Sci Rep. 2022. PMID: 35782302 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding factors influencing venous leg ulcer guideline implementation in Australian primary care.Int Wound J. 2020 Jun;17(3):804-818. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13334. Epub 2020 Mar 9. Int Wound J. 2020. PMID: 32150790 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ashby RL, Gabe R, Ali S, et al. . VenUS IV (Venous leg Ulcer Study IV) - compression hosiery compared with compression bandaging in the treatment of venous leg ulcers: a randomised controlled trial, mixed-treatment comparison and decision-analytic model. Health Technol Assess 2014;18:1–294. 10.3310/hta18570 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical