Utilizing deliberative engagement for identifying implementation strategy priorities: lessons learned from an online deliberative forum with dental professionals.
Utilizing deliberative engagement for identifying implementation strategy priorities: lessons learned from an online deliberative forum with dental professionals.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s43058-023-00496-2
复制
发表时间：
2023-09-21
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
选择有效的实施策略来支持与指南一致的牙科保健是一个复杂的过程。我们正在利用在DISGO研究期间收集的数据来反思我们在实施审议参与过程中遇到的障碍，以讨论与本干预措施中针对的循证指南相关的实施战略。目标是确定可能影响审议参与成功的因素，作为一种让卫生保健人员参与确定实施战略优先事项的技术。我们利用了DISGO研究期间收集的协商参与论坛的在线聊天记录。每次讨论都会自动生成聊天记录，并捕获所有参与牙科诊所的参与者和版主之间的书面交流。聊天记录按照内容分析方法进行分析。我们的研究结果揭示了在DISGO研究背景下成功实施协商参与的障碍。与会者不熟悉为论坛准备的材料，也不熟悉审议的主题。与会者也没有分享不同的观点，加强现有的想法，而不是介绍新的想法。为了确保在这项研究中遇到的障碍不再发生，重要的是要仔细考虑如何才能有效地为工作人员的审议做好准备。参与者必须熟悉指南的内容，大多数关于内容和证据的问题应该在审议参与会议之前得到回答。如果工作人员对准则的看法是相同的，简报材料应介绍补充工作人员现有观点的观点。还需要创造一种环境，使员工能够轻松地提出大多数同事可能不持有的意见。该项目已在ClinicalTrials.gov注册，ID为NCT04682730。该试验于2020年12月18日首次注册。https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730。
Selecting effective implementation strategies to support guideline-concordant dental care is a complex process. We are drawing on data collected during the DISGO study to reflect on barriers we encountered in implementing a deliberative engagement process for discussing implementation strategies relevant to the evidence-based guideline targeted in this intervention. The goal is to identify factors that may influence the success of deliberative engagement as a technique to involve healthcare staff in identifying priorities for implementation strategies. We drew on online chat transcripts from the deliberative engagement forums collected during the DISGO study. The chat transcripts were automatically generated for each discussion and captured the written exchanges between participants and moderators in all participating dental clinics. Chat transcripts were analyzed following a content analysis approach. Our findings revealed barriers to the successful implementation of deliberative engagement in the context of the DISGO study. Participants were not familiar with the materials that had been prepared for the forum and lacked familiarity with the topic of deliberation. Participants also did not share divergent viewpoints and reinforced existing ideas rather than introducing new ideas. In order to ensure that obstacles that were encountered in this study are not repeated, it is important to carefully consider how staff can effectively be prepared for the deliberations. Participants must be familiar with the content of the guideline, and most questions about the content and evidence should be answered before the deliberative engagement sessions. If perspectives among staff on a guideline are homogenous, briefing materials should introduce perspectives that complement existing views among staff. It is also necessary to create an environment in which staff are comfortable introducing opinions that may not be held by the majority of colleagues. This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT04682730. The trial was first registered on 12/18/2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04682730.