ABSTRACT
Introduction: In low resource settings (LRS), utilization of Computed Tomography scan (CTS) for mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBIs) presents unique challenges and considerations given the limited infrastructure, financial resources, and trained personnel. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) offers a comprehensive theoretical lens to explore factors influencing the decision-making to order CTS for mTBI by imaging referrers (IRs). Objectives: The primary objective was to explore IRs' beliefs about factors influencing CT utilization in mTBIs using TDF in Uganda.Differences in the factors influencing CTS ordering behavior across specialties, levels of experience, and hospital category were also explored. Materials and Methods: In-depth semi-structured interviews guided by TDF were conducted among purposively selected IRs from 6 tertiary public and private hospitals with functional CTS services. A thematic analysis was performed with codes and emerging themes developed based on the TDF. Results: Eleven IRs including medical officers, non-neurosurgeon specialists and neurosurgeons aged on average 42 years (SD+/-12.3 years) participated.Identified factors within skills domain involved IRs' clinical assessment and decision-making abilities, while beliefs about capabilities and consequences encompassed their confidence in diagnostic abilities and perceptions of CTS risks and benefits. The environmental context and resources domain addressed the availability of CT scanners and financial constraints. The knowledge domain elicited IRs' understanding of clinical guidelines and evidence-based practices while social influences considered peer influence and institutional culture. For memory, attention & decision processes domain, IRs adherence to guidelines and intentions to order CT scans were cited. Conclusion: Using TDF, IRs identified several factors believed to influence decision making to order CTS in mTBI in a LRS. The findings can inform stakeholders to develop targeted strategies and evidence-based interventions to optimize CT utilization in mTBI such as; educational programs, workflow modifications, decision support tools, and infrastructure improvements, among others.
ABSTRACT
Africa has seen an upsurge in diagnostic imaging utilization, with benefits of efficient and accurate diagnosis, but these could easily be offset by undesirable effects attributed to unjustified, unoptimized imaging and poor quality examinations. This paper aims to present Africa's position regarding quality and safety in imaging, give reasons for the rising interest in quality and safety, define quality and safety from an African context, list drivers for quality and safety in Africa, discuss the impact of COVID-19 on quality and safety, and review Africa's progress using the Bonn Call for Action framework while proposing a way forward for imaging quality and safety in Africa. In spite of a healthcare setting characterized by meagre financial, human and technology resources, a rapidly widening disease-burden spectrum, growing proportion of non-communicable diseases and resurgence of tropical and global infections, Africa has over the last ten years made significant strides in quality and safety for imaging. These include raising radiation-safety awareness, interest and application of evidence-based radiation safety recommendations and guidance tools, establishing facility and national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and strengthening end-user education and training. Major challenges are: limited human resource, low prioritization of imaging in relation to other health services, low level of integration of imaging into the entire health service delivery, insufficient awareness for radiation safety awareness, a radiation safety culture which is emerging, insufficient facilities and opportunities for education and training. Solutions to these challenges should target the entire hierarchy of health service delivery from prioritization, policy, planning, processes to procedures.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: To identify, categorize, and develop an aggregated synthesis of evidence using the theoretical domains framework (TDF) on barriers and facilitators that influence implementation of clinical imaging guidelines (CIGs) by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in diagnostic imaging. Methods: The protocol will be guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2014. Methodology for JBI Mixed Methods Systematic Reviews and will adhere to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA-P). Information source will include databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library), internet search (https://www.google.com/scholar), experts' opinion, professional societies/organizations websites and government bodies strategies/recommendations, and reference lists of included studies. Articles of any study design published in English from 1990 to date, having investigated factors operating as barriers and/or facilitators to the implementation CIGs by HCPs will be eligible. Selecting, appraising, and extracting data from the included studies will be independently performed by at least two reviewers using validated tools and Rayyan - Systematic Review web application. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus and a third reviewer as a tie breaker. The aggregated studies will be synthesized using thematic analysis guided by TDF. Results: Identified barriers will be defined a priori and mapped into 7 TDF domains including knowledge, awareness, effectiveness, time, litigationand financial incentives. Conclusion: The results will provide an insight into a theory-based approach to predict behavior-related determinants for implementing CIGs and develop strategies/interventions to target the elicited behaviors. Recommendations will be made if the level of evidence is sufficient. Advances in knowledge: Resource-constrained settings that are in the process of adopting CIGs may opt for this strategy to predict in advance likely impediments to achieving the goal of CIG implementation and develop tailored interventions during the planning phase.Systematic review Registration: PROSPERO ID = CRD42020136372 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).
