Impact of a team-based versus individual clinician-focused training approach on primary healthcare professionals' intention to have serious illness conversations with patients: A theory-informed process evaluation embedded within a cluster randomized trial.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 40138335.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0298994 and PMC identifier 11940443.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Cluster randomized trials (cRTs) on the effectiveness of training programs face complex challenges when conducted in real-world settings. Process evaluations embedded within cRTs can help explain their results by exploring possible causal mechanisms impacting training effectiveness. To conduct a process evaluation embedded within a cRT by comparing the impact of team-based vs. individual clinician-focused SICP training on primary healthcare professionals' (PHCPs) intention to have serious illness conversations with patients. The cRT involved 45 primary care practices randomized into a team-based (intervention) or individual clinician-focused (comparator) training program and measured primary outcomes at the patient level: days at home and goals of care. To perform this theory-informed mixed-methods process evaluation embedded within the cRT, a different outcome was measured at the level of the PHCPs, namely, PHCPs' intention to have serious illness conversations with patients as measured with CPD-Reaction. Barriers and facilitators to implementing the conversations were identified through open-ended questions and analyzed using the Theoretical Domains Framework. The COM-B framework was used to triangulate data. Results were reported using the CONSORT and GRAMMS reporting guidelines. Of 535 PHCPs from 45 practices, 373 (69.7%) fully completed CPD-Reaction (30.8% between 25-34 years old; 78.0% women; 54.2% had a doctoral degree; 50.1% were primary care physicians). Mean intention scores for the team-based (n = 223) and individual clinician-focused arms (n = 150) were 5.97 (standard error (SE): 0.11) and 6.42 (SE: 0.13), respectively. Mean difference between arms was 0.0 (95% CI -0.29; 0.30; p = 0.99) after adjusting for age, education and profession. The team-based arm reported barriers with communication, workflow, and more discomfort in having serious illness conversations with patients. Team-based training did not outperform individual clinician-focused in influencing PHCPs' intention to have serious illness conversations. This process evaluation suggests that team-based training could improve intervention effectiveness by focusing on interprofessional communication, better organized workflows, and better support and training for non-clinician team members. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03577002).
Medical subject headings
- Primary Health Care
- Health Personnel
- Communication
- Patient Care Team
- Physician-Patient Relations