Premium
Practitioner experiences from the structured implementation of evidence‐based practice in primary care physiotherapy: A qualitative study
Author(s) -
Carlfjord Siw,
NilsingStrid Emma,
Johansson Kajsa,
Holmgren Theresa,
Öberg Birgitta
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of evaluation in clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.737
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2753
pISSN - 1356-1294
DOI - 10.1111/jep.13034
Subject(s) - focus group , qualitative research , psychological intervention , medicine , implementation research , nursing , evidence based practice , medical education , content analysis , health care , best practice , psychology , alternative medicine , social science , pathology , marketing , sociology , economics , business , economic growth , management
Rationale, Aims, and Objectives To provide best available care, the practitioners in primary health care (PHC) must have adequate knowledge about effective interventions. The implementation of such interventions is challenging. A structured implementation strategy developed by researchers at Linköping University, Sweden, was used for the implementation of an evidence‐based assessment and treatment programme for patients with subacromial pain among physiotherapists in PHC. To further develop strategies for implementation of evidence‐based practices, it was deemed important to study the implementation from the practitioners' perspective. The aim of this study was to explore the practitioners' experiences from the implementation. Methods A qualitative design with focus group discussions was applied. The implementation in terms of perceptions of process and outcome was evaluated by focus group discussions with, in total, 16 physiotherapists in the target group. Data were analysed using the method qualitative content analysis. Results The components of the strategy were viewed positively, and the applicability and evidence base behind the programme were appreciated. The programme was perceived to be adopted, and the practitioners described a changed behaviour and increased confidence in handling patients with subacromial pain. Both patient‐ and provider‐related challenges to the implementation were mentioned. Conclusions The practitioners' experiences from the implementation were mainly positive. A strategy with collaboration between academy and practice, and with education and implementation teams as facilitators, resulted in changes in practice. Critical voices concerned interprofessional collaboration and that the programme was focused explicitly on the shoulder, not including other components of physical function.