Cargando…

Implementation Initiatives to Improve Low Back Pain Care in Australia: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to comprehensively review strategies for implementation of low back pain (LBP) guidelines, policies, and models of care in the Australian health care system. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Costa, Nathalia, Blyth, Fiona M, Amorim, Anita B, Parambath, Sarika, Shanmuganathan, Selvanaayagam, Huckel Schneider, Carmen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35758625
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnac102
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to comprehensively review strategies for implementation of low back pain (LBP) guidelines, policies, and models of care in the Australian health care system. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and Web of Science to identify studies that aimed to implement or integrate evidence-based interventions or practices to improve LBP care within Australian settings. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies targeted primary care settings (n = 13). Other settings included tertiary care (n = 4), community (n = 4), and pharmacies (n = 3). One study targeted both primary and tertiary care settings (n = 1). Only 40% of the included studies reported an underpinning framework, model, or theory. The implementation strategies most frequently used were evaluative and iterative strategies (n = 14, 56%) and train and educate stakeholders (n = 13, 52%), followed by engage consumers (n = 6, 24%), develop stakeholder relationships (n = 4, 16%), change in infrastructure (n = 4, 16%), and support clinicians (n = 3, 12%). The most common implementation outcomes considered were acceptability (n = 11, 44%) and adoption (n = 10, 40%), followed by appropriateness (n = 7, 28%), cost (n = 3, 12%), feasibility (n = 1, 4%), and fidelity (n = 1, 4%). Barriers included time constraints, funding, and teamwork availability. Facilitators included funding and collaboration between stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation research targeting LBP appears to be a young field, mostly focusing on training and educating stakeholders in primary care. Outcomes on sustainability and penetration of evidence-based interventions are lacking. There is a need for implementation research guided by established frameworks that consider interrelationships between organizational and system contexts beyond the clinician–patient dyad.