Cargando…

The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation

AIM: To evaluate healthcare professionals' performance and treatment fidelity in the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse‐coordinated transitional care intervention in older cardiac patients to understand and interpret the study results. DESIGN: A mixed‐methods process evaluation based on the Medica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Verweij, Lotte, Spoon, Denise F., Terbraak, Michel S., Jepma, Patricia, Peters, Ron J. G., Scholte Op Reimer, Wilma J. M., Latour, Corine H. M., Buurman, Bianca M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8048800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33594695
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jan.14786
_version_ 1783679298083749888
author Verweij, Lotte
Spoon, Denise F.
Terbraak, Michel S.
Jepma, Patricia
Peters, Ron J. G.
Scholte Op Reimer, Wilma J. M.
Latour, Corine H. M.
Buurman, Bianca M.
author_facet Verweij, Lotte
Spoon, Denise F.
Terbraak, Michel S.
Jepma, Patricia
Peters, Ron J. G.
Scholte Op Reimer, Wilma J. M.
Latour, Corine H. M.
Buurman, Bianca M.
author_sort Verweij, Lotte
collection PubMed
description AIM: To evaluate healthcare professionals' performance and treatment fidelity in the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse‐coordinated transitional care intervention in older cardiac patients to understand and interpret the study results. DESIGN: A mixed‐methods process evaluation based on the Medical Research Council Process Evaluation framework. METHODS: Quantitative data on intervention key elements were collected from 153 logbooks of all intervention patients. Qualitative data were collected using semi‐structured interviews with 19 CCB professionals (cardiac nurses, community nurses and primary care physical therapists), from June 2017 until October 2018. Qualitative data‐analysis is based on thematic analysis and integrated with quantitative key element outcomes. The analysis was blinded to trial outcomes. Fidelity was defined as the level of intervention adherence. RESULTS: The overall intervention fidelity was 67%, ranging from severely low fidelity in the consultation of in‐hospital geriatric teams (17%) to maximum fidelity in the comprehensive geriatric assessment (100%). Main themes of influence in the intervention performance that emerged from the interviews are interdisciplinary collaboration, organizational preconditions, confidence in the programme, time management and patient characteristics. In addition to practical issues, the patient's frailty status and limited motivation were barriers to the intervention. CONCLUSION: Although involved healthcare professionals expressed their confidence in the intervention, the fidelity rate was suboptimal. This could have influenced the non‐significant effect of the CCB intervention on the primary composite outcome of readmission and mortality 6 months after randomization. Feasibility of intervention key elements should be reconsidered in relation to experienced barriers and the population. IMPACT: In addition to insight in effectiveness, insight in intervention fidelity and performance is necessary to understand the mechanism of impact. This study demonstrates that the suboptimal fidelity was subject to a complex interplay of organizational, professionals' and patients' issues. The results support intervention redesign and inform future development of transitional care interventions in older cardiac patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8048800
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80488002021-04-20 The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation Verweij, Lotte Spoon, Denise F. Terbraak, Michel S. Jepma, Patricia Peters, Ron J. G. Scholte Op Reimer, Wilma J. M. Latour, Corine H. M. Buurman, Bianca M. J Adv Nurs Research Papers AIM: To evaluate healthcare professionals' performance and treatment fidelity in the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse‐coordinated transitional care intervention in older cardiac patients to understand and interpret the study results. DESIGN: A mixed‐methods process evaluation based on the Medical Research Council Process Evaluation framework. METHODS: Quantitative data on intervention key elements were collected from 153 logbooks of all intervention patients. Qualitative data were collected using semi‐structured interviews with 19 CCB professionals (cardiac nurses, community nurses and primary care physical therapists), from June 2017 until October 2018. Qualitative data‐analysis is based on thematic analysis and integrated with quantitative key element outcomes. The analysis was blinded to trial outcomes. Fidelity was defined as the level of intervention adherence. RESULTS: The overall intervention fidelity was 67%, ranging from severely low fidelity in the consultation of in‐hospital geriatric teams (17%) to maximum fidelity in the comprehensive geriatric assessment (100%). Main themes of influence in the intervention performance that emerged from the interviews are interdisciplinary collaboration, organizational preconditions, confidence in the programme, time management and patient characteristics. In addition to practical issues, the patient's frailty status and limited motivation were barriers to the intervention. CONCLUSION: Although involved healthcare professionals expressed their confidence in the intervention, the fidelity rate was suboptimal. This could have influenced the non‐significant effect of the CCB intervention on the primary composite outcome of readmission and mortality 6 months after randomization. Feasibility of intervention key elements should be reconsidered in relation to experienced barriers and the population. IMPACT: In addition to insight in effectiveness, insight in intervention fidelity and performance is necessary to understand the mechanism of impact. This study demonstrates that the suboptimal fidelity was subject to a complex interplay of organizational, professionals' and patients' issues. The results support intervention redesign and inform future development of transitional care interventions in older cardiac patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-02-17 2021-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8048800/ /pubmed/33594695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jan.14786 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Advanced Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Papers
Verweij, Lotte
Spoon, Denise F.
Terbraak, Michel S.
Jepma, Patricia
Peters, Ron J. G.
Scholte Op Reimer, Wilma J. M.
Latour, Corine H. M.
Buurman, Bianca M.
The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation
title The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation
title_full The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation
title_fullStr The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation
title_full_unstemmed The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation
title_short The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: A mixed‐methods process evaluation
title_sort cardiac care bridge randomized trial in high‐risk older cardiac patients: a mixed‐methods process evaluation
topic Research Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8048800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33594695
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jan.14786
work_keys_str_mv AT verweijlotte thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT spoondenisef thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT terbraakmichels thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT jepmapatricia thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT petersronjg thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT scholteopreimerwilmajm thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT latourcorinehm thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT buurmanbiancam thecardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT verweijlotte cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT spoondenisef cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT terbraakmichels cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT jepmapatricia cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT petersronjg cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT scholteopreimerwilmajm cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT latourcorinehm cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation
AT buurmanbiancam cardiaccarebridgerandomizedtrialinhighriskoldercardiacpatientsamixedmethodsprocessevaluation