Cargando…

Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study

OBJECTIVES: This study reports a process evaluation of the Otago MASTER (MAnagement of Subacromial disorders of The shouldER) feasibility trial. This mixed-methods, process evaluation study was conducted parallel to the Otago MASTER feasibility trial. Our aims were to investigate: (1) supervised tre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ribeiro, Daniel C, Wilkinson, Amanda, Voney, Melanie, Sole, Gisela, Lamb, Sarah E, Abbott, J Haxby
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10151965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37094901
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067745
_version_ 1785035654332153856
author Ribeiro, Daniel C
Wilkinson, Amanda
Voney, Melanie
Sole, Gisela
Lamb, Sarah E
Abbott, J Haxby
author_facet Ribeiro, Daniel C
Wilkinson, Amanda
Voney, Melanie
Sole, Gisela
Lamb, Sarah E
Abbott, J Haxby
author_sort Ribeiro, Daniel C
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study reports a process evaluation of the Otago MASTER (MAnagement of Subacromial disorders of The shouldER) feasibility trial. This mixed-methods, process evaluation study was conducted parallel to the Otago MASTER feasibility trial. Our aims were to investigate: (1) supervised treatment fidelity of the interventions and (2) clinicians’ perceptions of the trial interventions through a focus group. DESIGN: Nested process evaluation study using a mixed-methods approach. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Five clinicians (two men, three women) aged 47–67 years, with clinical experience of 18–43 years and a minimum of postgraduate certificate training, were involved with the delivery of interventions within the feasibility trial. We assessed treatment fidelity for supervised exercises through audit of clinicians’ records and compared those with the planned protocol. Clinicians took part in a focus group that lasted for approximately 1 hour. The focus group was transcribed verbatim and focus group discussion was analysed thematically using an iterative approach. RESULTS: The fidelity score for the tailored exercise and manual therapy intervention was 80.3% (SD: 7.7%) and for the standardised exercise intervention, 82.9% (SD: 5.9%). Clinicians’ perspectives about the trial and planned intervention were summarised by one main theme ‘conflict experienced between individual clinical practice and the intervention protocol’, which was supported by three subthemes: (1) programme strengths and weaknesses; (2) design-related and administrative barriers; and (3) training-related barriers. CONCLUSION: This mixed-methods study assessed supervised treatment fidelity of interventions and clinicians’ perceptions on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial. Overall, treatment fidelity was acceptable for both intervention arms; however, we observed low fidelity for certain domains within the tailored exercise and manual therapy intervention. Our focus group identified several barriers clinicians faced while delivering the planned interventions. Those findings are of relevance for planning the definite trial and for researchers conducting feasibility trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR: 12617001405303.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10151965
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101519652023-05-03 Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study Ribeiro, Daniel C Wilkinson, Amanda Voney, Melanie Sole, Gisela Lamb, Sarah E Abbott, J Haxby BMJ Open Rehabilitation Medicine OBJECTIVES: This study reports a process evaluation of the Otago MASTER (MAnagement of Subacromial disorders of The shouldER) feasibility trial. This mixed-methods, process evaluation study was conducted parallel to the Otago MASTER feasibility trial. Our aims were to investigate: (1) supervised treatment fidelity of the interventions and (2) clinicians’ perceptions of the trial interventions through a focus group. DESIGN: Nested process evaluation study using a mixed-methods approach. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Five clinicians (two men, three women) aged 47–67 years, with clinical experience of 18–43 years and a minimum of postgraduate certificate training, were involved with the delivery of interventions within the feasibility trial. We assessed treatment fidelity for supervised exercises through audit of clinicians’ records and compared those with the planned protocol. Clinicians took part in a focus group that lasted for approximately 1 hour. The focus group was transcribed verbatim and focus group discussion was analysed thematically using an iterative approach. RESULTS: The fidelity score for the tailored exercise and manual therapy intervention was 80.3% (SD: 7.7%) and for the standardised exercise intervention, 82.9% (SD: 5.9%). Clinicians’ perspectives about the trial and planned intervention were summarised by one main theme ‘conflict experienced between individual clinical practice and the intervention protocol’, which was supported by three subthemes: (1) programme strengths and weaknesses; (2) design-related and administrative barriers; and (3) training-related barriers. CONCLUSION: This mixed-methods study assessed supervised treatment fidelity of interventions and clinicians’ perceptions on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial. Overall, treatment fidelity was acceptable for both intervention arms; however, we observed low fidelity for certain domains within the tailored exercise and manual therapy intervention. Our focus group identified several barriers clinicians faced while delivering the planned interventions. Those findings are of relevance for planning the definite trial and for researchers conducting feasibility trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR: 12617001405303. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10151965/ /pubmed/37094901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067745 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Rehabilitation Medicine
Ribeiro, Daniel C
Wilkinson, Amanda
Voney, Melanie
Sole, Gisela
Lamb, Sarah E
Abbott, J Haxby
Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
title Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
title_full Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
title_fullStr Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
title_full_unstemmed Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
title_short Clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the Otago MASTER feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
title_sort clinicians’ perspectives on planned interventions tested in the otago master feasibility trial: an implementation-based process evaluation study
topic Rehabilitation Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10151965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37094901
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067745
work_keys_str_mv AT ribeirodanielc cliniciansperspectivesonplannedinterventionstestedintheotagomasterfeasibilitytrialanimplementationbasedprocessevaluationstudy
AT wilkinsonamanda cliniciansperspectivesonplannedinterventionstestedintheotagomasterfeasibilitytrialanimplementationbasedprocessevaluationstudy
AT voneymelanie cliniciansperspectivesonplannedinterventionstestedintheotagomasterfeasibilitytrialanimplementationbasedprocessevaluationstudy
AT solegisela cliniciansperspectivesonplannedinterventionstestedintheotagomasterfeasibilitytrialanimplementationbasedprocessevaluationstudy
AT lambsarahe cliniciansperspectivesonplannedinterventionstestedintheotagomasterfeasibilitytrialanimplementationbasedprocessevaluationstudy
AT abbottjhaxby cliniciansperspectivesonplannedinterventionstestedintheotagomasterfeasibilitytrialanimplementationbasedprocessevaluationstudy