Cargando…

Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback (A&F) often successfully enhances health professionals’ intentions to improve quality of care but does not consistently lead to practice changes. Recipients often cite data credibility and limited resources as barriers impeding their ability to act upon A&F, su...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Desveaux, Laura, Ivers, Noah Michael, Devotta, Kim, Ramji, Noor, Weyman, Karen, Kiran, Tara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33596946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01088-1
_version_ 1783652649302753280
author Desveaux, Laura
Ivers, Noah Michael
Devotta, Kim
Ramji, Noor
Weyman, Karen
Kiran, Tara
author_facet Desveaux, Laura
Ivers, Noah Michael
Devotta, Kim
Ramji, Noor
Weyman, Karen
Kiran, Tara
author_sort Desveaux, Laura
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback (A&F) often successfully enhances health professionals’ intentions to improve quality of care but does not consistently lead to practice changes. Recipients often cite data credibility and limited resources as barriers impeding their ability to act upon A&F, suggesting the intention-to-action gap manifests while recipients are interacting with their data. While attention has been paid to the role feedback and contextual variables play in contributing to (or impeding) success, we lack a nuanced understanding of how healthcare professionals interact with and process clinical performance data. METHODS: We used qualitative, semi-structured interviews guided by Normalization Process Theory (NPT). Questions explored the role of data in quality improvement, experiences with the A&F report, perceptions of the data, and interpretations and reflections. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive strategies using reflexive thematic analysis informed by a constructivist paradigm. RESULTS: Healthcare professional characteristics (individual quality improvement capabilities and beliefs about data) seem to influence engagement with A&F to a greater degree than feedback variables (i.e., delivered by peers) and observed contextual factors (i.e., strong quality improvement culture). Most participants lacked the capabilities to interpret practice-level data in an actionable way despite a motivation to engage meaningfully. Reasons for the intention-to-action gap included challenges interpreting longitudinal data, appreciating the nuances of common data sources, understanding how aggregate data provides insights into individualized care, and identifying practice-level actions to improve quality. These factors limited effective cognitive participation and collective action, as outlined in NPT. CONCLUSIONS: A well-designed A&F intervention is necessary but not sufficient to inform practice changes. A&F initiatives must include co-interventions to address recipient characteristics (i.e., beliefs and capabilities) and context to optimize impact. Effective strategies to overcome the intention-to-action gap may include modelling how to use A&F to inform practice change, providing opportunities for social interaction relating to the A&F, and circulating examples of effective actions taken in response to A&F. More broadly, undergraduate medical education and post-graduate training must ensure physicians are equipped with QI capabilities, with an emphasis on the skills required to interpret and act on practice-level data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01088-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7891166
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78911662021-02-22 Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback Desveaux, Laura Ivers, Noah Michael Devotta, Kim Ramji, Noor Weyman, Karen Kiran, Tara Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback (A&F) often successfully enhances health professionals’ intentions to improve quality of care but does not consistently lead to practice changes. Recipients often cite data credibility and limited resources as barriers impeding their ability to act upon A&F, suggesting the intention-to-action gap manifests while recipients are interacting with their data. While attention has been paid to the role feedback and contextual variables play in contributing to (or impeding) success, we lack a nuanced understanding of how healthcare professionals interact with and process clinical performance data. METHODS: We used qualitative, semi-structured interviews guided by Normalization Process Theory (NPT). Questions explored the role of data in quality improvement, experiences with the A&F report, perceptions of the data, and interpretations and reflections. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive strategies using reflexive thematic analysis informed by a constructivist paradigm. RESULTS: Healthcare professional characteristics (individual quality improvement capabilities and beliefs about data) seem to influence engagement with A&F to a greater degree than feedback variables (i.e., delivered by peers) and observed contextual factors (i.e., strong quality improvement culture). Most participants lacked the capabilities to interpret practice-level data in an actionable way despite a motivation to engage meaningfully. Reasons for the intention-to-action gap included challenges interpreting longitudinal data, appreciating the nuances of common data sources, understanding how aggregate data provides insights into individualized care, and identifying practice-level actions to improve quality. These factors limited effective cognitive participation and collective action, as outlined in NPT. CONCLUSIONS: A well-designed A&F intervention is necessary but not sufficient to inform practice changes. A&F initiatives must include co-interventions to address recipient characteristics (i.e., beliefs and capabilities) and context to optimize impact. Effective strategies to overcome the intention-to-action gap may include modelling how to use A&F to inform practice change, providing opportunities for social interaction relating to the A&F, and circulating examples of effective actions taken in response to A&F. More broadly, undergraduate medical education and post-graduate training must ensure physicians are equipped with QI capabilities, with an emphasis on the skills required to interpret and act on practice-level data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01088-1. BioMed Central 2021-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7891166/ /pubmed/33596946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01088-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Desveaux, Laura
Ivers, Noah Michael
Devotta, Kim
Ramji, Noor
Weyman, Karen
Kiran, Tara
Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
title Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
title_full Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
title_fullStr Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
title_full_unstemmed Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
title_short Unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
title_sort unpacking the intention to action gap: a qualitative study understanding how physicians engage with audit and feedback
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33596946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01088-1
work_keys_str_mv AT desveauxlaura unpackingtheintentiontoactiongapaqualitativestudyunderstandinghowphysiciansengagewithauditandfeedback
AT iversnoahmichael unpackingtheintentiontoactiongapaqualitativestudyunderstandinghowphysiciansengagewithauditandfeedback
AT devottakim unpackingtheintentiontoactiongapaqualitativestudyunderstandinghowphysiciansengagewithauditandfeedback
AT ramjinoor unpackingtheintentiontoactiongapaqualitativestudyunderstandinghowphysiciansengagewithauditandfeedback
AT weymankaren unpackingtheintentiontoactiongapaqualitativestudyunderstandinghowphysiciansengagewithauditandfeedback
AT kirantara unpackingtheintentiontoactiongapaqualitativestudyunderstandinghowphysiciansengagewithauditandfeedback