Factors influencing fidelity to guideline implementation strategies for improving pain care at cancer centres: a qualitative sub-study of the Stop Cancer PAIN Trial
- PMID: 39174979
- PMCID: PMC11342688
- DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-11243-1
Factors influencing fidelity to guideline implementation strategies for improving pain care at cancer centres: a qualitative sub-study of the Stop Cancer PAIN Trial
Abstract
Background: The Stop Cancer PAIN Trial was a phase III pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial which compared effectiveness of screening and guidelines with or without implementation strategies for improving pain in adults with cancer attending six Australian outpatient comprehensive cancer centres (n = 688). A system for pain screening was introduced before observation of a 'control' phase. Implementation strategies introduced in the 'intervention' phase included: (1) audit of adherence to guideline recommendations, with feedback to clinical teams; (2) health professional education via an email-administered 'spaced education' module; and (3) a patient education booklet and self-management resource. Selection of strategies was informed by the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) Model (Michie et al., 2011) and evidence for each strategy's stand-alone effectiveness. A consultant physician at each centre supported the intervention as a 'clinical champion'. However, fidelity to the intervention was limited, and the Trial did not demonstrate effectiveness. This paper reports a sub-study of the Trial which aimed to identify factors inhibiting or enabling fidelity to inform future guideline implementation initiatives.
Methods: The qualitative sub-study enabled in-depth exploration of factors from the perspectives of personnel at each centre. Clinical champions, clinicians and clinic receptionists were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Analysis used a framework method and a largely deductive approach based on the COM-B Model.
Results: Twenty-four people participated, including 15 physicians, 8 nurses and 1 clinic receptionist. Coding against the COM-B Model identified 'capability' to be the most influential component, with 'opportunity' and 'motivation' playing largely subsidiary roles. Findings suggest that fidelity could have been improved by: considering the readiness for change of each clinical setting; better articulating the intervention's value proposition; defining clinician roles and responsibilities, addressing perceptions that pain care falls beyond oncology clinicians' scopes of practice; integrating the intervention within existing systems and processes; promoting patient-clinician partnerships; investing in clinical champions among senior nursing and junior medical personnel, supported by medical leaders; and planning for slow incremental change rather than rapid uptake.
Conclusions: Future guideline implementation interventions may require a 'meta-implementation' approach based on complex systems theory to successfully integrate multiple strategies.
Trial registration: Registry: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; number: ACTRN 12615000064505; data: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspxid=367236&isReview=true .
Keywords: Cancer; Guidelines; Implementation; Pain; Qualitative.
© 2024. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no competing interests.
Similar articles
-
Protocol for a phase III pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening and guidelines with, versus without, implementation strategies for improving pain in adults with cancer attending outpatient oncology and palliative care services: the Stop Cancer PAIN trial.BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jul 16;18(1):558. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3318-0. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018. PMID: 30012122 Free PMC article.
-
A phase III wait-listed randomised controlled trial of novel targeted inter-professional clinical education intervention to improve cancer patients' reported pain outcomes (The Cancer Pain Assessment (CPAS) Trial): study protocol.Trials. 2019 Jan 18;20(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3152-z. Trials. 2019. PMID: 30658657 Free PMC article.
-
Stakeholder perspectives of a pilot multicomponent delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in palliative care units: A behaviour change theory-based qualitative study.Palliat Med. 2022 Sep;36(8):1273-1284. doi: 10.1177/02692163221113163. Epub 2022 Aug 11. Palliat Med. 2022. PMID: 36062724
-
Barriers and facilitators to clinical behaviour change by primary care practitioners: a theory-informed systematic review of reviews using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel.Syst Rev. 2022 Aug 30;11(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-02030-2. Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36042457 Free PMC article.
-
Behaviour change and rehabilitation adherence in adults with tendinopathy: a scoping review.Disabil Rehabil. 2024 Dec;46(25):6021-6033. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2024.2320832. Epub 2024 Feb 29. Disabil Rehabil. 2024. PMID: 38420953
References
-
- Luckett T, Davidson PM, Green A, Boyle F, Stubbs J, Lovell M. Assessment and management of adult cancer pain: a systematic review and synthesis of recent qualitative studies aimed at developing insights for managing barriers and optimizing facilitators within a comprehensive framework of patient care. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2013;46(2):229–53.10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.07.021 - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources