Identifying determinants of care for tailoring implementation in chronic diseases: an evaluation of different methods.

BACKGROUND: The tailoring of implementation interventions includes the identification of the determinants of, or barriers to, healthcare practice. Different methods for identifying determinants have been used in implementation projects, but which methods are most appropriate to use is unknown. METHODS: The study was undertaken in five European countries, recommendations for a different chronic condition being addressed in each country: Germany (polypharmacy in multimorbid patients); the Netherlands (cardiovascular risk management); Norway (depression in the elderly); Poland (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease--COPD); and the United Kingdom (UK) (obesity). Using samples of professionals and patients in each country, three methods were compared directly: brainstorming amongst health professionals, interviews of health professionals, and interviews of patients. The additional value of discussion structured through reference to a checklist of determinants in addition to brainstorming, and determinants identified by open questions in a questionnaire survey, were investigated separately. The questionnaire, which included closed questions derived from a checklist of determinants, was administered to samples of health professionals in each country. Determinants were classified according to whether it was likely that they would inform the design of an implementation intervention (defined as plausibly important determinants). RESULTS: A total of 601 determinants judged to be plausibly important were identified. An additional 609 determinants were judged to be unlikely to inform an implementation intervention, and were classified as not plausibly important. Brainstorming identified 194 of the plausibly important determinants, health professional interviews 152, patient interviews 63, and open questions 48. Structured group discussion identified 144 plausibly important determinants in addition to those already identified by brainstorming. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic methods can lead to the identification of large numbers of determinants. Tailoring will usually include a process to decide, from all the determinants that are identified, those to be addressed by implementation interventions. There is no best buy of methods to identify determinants, and a combination should be used, depending on the topic and setting. Brainstorming is a simple, low cost method that could be relevant to many tailored implementation projects.

Health care assistants in primary care depression management: role perception, burdening factors, and disease conception.

PURPOSE: In primary care, the involvement of health care assistants (HCAs) in clinical depression management is an innovative approach. Little is known, however, about how HCAs experience their new tasks. We wanted to describe the perceptions and experiences of HCAs who provided case management to patients with depression in small primary care practices. METHODS: This qualitative study was nested in the Primary Care Monitoring for Depressive Patients Trial on case management in Germany. We used a semi-structured instrument to interview 26 HCAs and undertook content analysis. We focussed on 3 key aspects: role perception, burdening factors, and disease conception. RESULTS: Most HCAs said their new role provided them with personal and professional enrichment, and they were interested in improving patient-communication skills. They saw their major function as interacting with the patient and considered support for the family physician to be of less importance. Even so, some saw their role as a communication facilitator between family physician and patient. Burdening factors implementing the new tasks were the increased workload, the work environment, and difficulties interacting with depressed patients. HCAs' disease conception of depression was heterogeneous. After 1 year HCAs believed they were sufficiently familiar with their duties as case managers in depression management. CONCLUSION: HCAs were willing to extend their professional responsibilities from administrative work to more patient-centred work. Even if HCAs perform only monitoring tasks within the case management concept, the resulting workload is a limiting factor.