Conectar
Recent research has highlighted non-operative management (NOM) as a viable alternative for frail older adults with hip fractures in the final phase of life. This study aims to guide Dutch physicians and hospitals nationwide in a standardised implementation of shared decision-making regarding surgery or NOM in selected frail older adults with a hip fracture.
The patient population for implementation includes frail older adults aged ≥70 years with an acute proximal femoral fracture, nursing home care or a similar level of care elsewhere and at least one additional criterion (ie, malnutrition, severe mobility impairment or ASA≥4). The 2-year implementation study will be conducted in four phases. In phases 1 and 2, barriers and facilitators for implementation will be identified and an implementation protocol, educational materials and patient information will be developed. Phase 3 will involve an implementation pilot in 14 hospitals across the Netherlands. The protocol and educational material will be improved based on healthcare provider and patient experiences gathered through interviews. Phase 4 will focus on upscaling to nationwide implementation and the effect of the implementation on NOM rate will be measured using data from the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit.
The study was exempted by the local Medical Research Ethics Committee (MEC-2023-0270, 10 May 2023) and Medical Ethics Committee United (W23.083, 26 April 2023). The study’s results will be submitted to an open access international peer-reviewed journal. Its protocols, tools and results will be presented at several national and international academic conferences of relevant orthogeriatric (scientific) associations.
Current choice models in healthcare (and beyond) can provide suboptimal predictions of healthcare users’ decisions. One reason for such inaccuracy is that standard microeconomic theory assumes that decisions of healthcare users are made in a social vacuum. Healthcare choices, however, can in fact be (entirely) socially determined. To achieve more accurate choice predictions within healthcare and therefore better policy decisions, the social influences that affect healthcare user decision-making need to be identified and explicitly integrated into choice models. The purpose of this study is to develop a socially interdependent choice framework of healthcare user decision-making.
A mixed-methods approach will be used. A systematic literature review will be conducted that identifies the social influences on healthcare user decision-making. Based on the outcomes of a systematic literature review, an interview guide will be developed that assesses which, and how, social influences affect healthcare user decision-making in four different medical fields. This guide will be used during two exploratory focus groups to assess the engagement of participants and clarity of questions and probes. The refined interview guide will be used to conduct the semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals and users. These interviews will explore in detail which, and how, social influences affect healthcare user decision-making. Focus group and interview transcripts will be analysed iteratively using a constant comparative approach based on a mix of inductive and deductive coding. Based on the outcomes, a social influence independent choice framework for healthcare user decision-making will be drafted. Finally, the Delphi technique will be employed to achieve consensus about the final version of this choice framework.
This study was approved by the Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management Research Ethics Review Committee (ESHPM, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; reference ETH2122-0666).
To explore which factors, influencing dietary behaviour change support among patients by Dutch community nurses (CNs; nurses), are key focal points in training programmes.
Nurses have an important role in counselling patients towards healthier dietary behaviour to prevent or delay long-term complications from chronic lifestyle-related diseases. Most nurses do not incorporate dietary behaviour change support in their routines to the fullest potential.
A qualitative descriptive study.
Data were collected in the Netherlands in 2018–2019 via semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 18 nurses. Interview guide themes were informed by the COM-B model, using validated descriptions in Dutch. Data were recorded, transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.
Factors that affected dietary behaviour change support were linked to (1) the nurse (role identity, dietary knowledge and competences such as methodical approach, behaviour change techniques and communication techniques), (2) nurse–patient encounter (building a relationship with a patient, supporting patient autonomy and tailoring the approach) and (3) cooperation and organizational context.
It is of utmost importance to pay attention to nurses' role identity regarding dietary behaviour change support, as this underlies professional behaviour. This should be accompanied by improving competences on dietary behaviour change support. Focus on competences regarding the application of behaviour change technique is crucial. Furthermore, having a relationship of trust with a patient was important for discussing sensitive topics such as diet.
The promotion of a healthy diet provides opportunities to contribute to patient autonomy and self-management. Well-fitted training offers for (senior) nurses will lead to improved professional practice of nurses, leading to healthier dietary behaviour of patients.
A nurse provided feedback on the interview guide.
To evaluate the impact of an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) programme, tailored for people living with type 1 diabetes, on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), self-management and psychosocial factors among individuals with HbA1c>60 mmol/mol compared with treatment as usual (TAU).
An endocrinologic clinic in Sweden.
In this randomised controlled trial, 81 individuals with type 1 diabetes, aged 18–70 years with HbA1c>60 mmol/mol, were randomly assigned to either an ACT group intervention or TAU. Exclusion criteria were: unable to speak Swedish, untreated or severe psychiatric disease, cortisone treatment, untreated thyroid disease and newly started insulin pump therapy. At the 2-year follow-up, HbA1c was measured in 26 individuals.
The ACT programme comprised seven 2-hour sessions held over 14 weeks and focused on acceptance of stressful thoughts and emotions, and to promote value-based committed action.
The primary outcome was HbA1c, and the secondary outcomes were measures of depression, anxiety, general stress, fear of hypoglycaemia, diabetes distress, self-care activities, psychological flexibility (general and related to diabetes) and quality of life. The primary endpoint was HbA1c 2 years after the intervention programme. Linear mixed models were used to test for an interaction effect between measurement time and group.
Likelihood ratio test of nested models demonstrated no statistically significant interaction effect (2=0.49, p=0.485) between measurement time and group regarding HbA1c. However, a statistically significant interaction effect (likelihood ratio test 2=12.63, p
No statistically significant difference was found between the groups regarding the primary outcome measure, HbA1c. However, the ACT programme showed a persistent beneficial impact on psychological flexibility in the intervention group. The dropout rate was higher than expected, which may indicate a challenge in this type of study.
Current treatment decision-making in high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) care is not informed by individualised risks for different treatment options and patients’ preferences. Risk prediction tools may provide patients and professionals insight in personalised risks and benefits for different treatment options and thereby potentially increase patients’ knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. The VALUE-PERSARC study aims to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of a personalised risk assessment tool (PERSARC) to increase patients’ knowledge about risks and benefits of treatment options and to reduce decisional conflict in comparison with usual care in high-grade extremity STS patients.
The VALUE-PERSARC study is a parallel cluster randomised control trial that aims to include at least 120 primarily diagnosed high-grade extremity STS patients in 6 Dutch hospitals. Eligible patients (≥18 years) are those without a treatment plan and treated with curative intent. Patients with sarcoma subtypes or treatment options not mentioned in PERSARC are unable to participate. Hospitals will be randomised between usual care (control) or care with the use of PERSARC (intervention). In the intervention condition, PERSARC will be used by STS professionals in multidisciplinary tumour boards to guide treatment advice and in patient consultations, where the oncological/orthopaedic surgeon informs the patient about his/her diagnosis and discusses benefits and harms of all relevant treatment options. The primary outcomes are patients’ knowledge about risks and benefits of treatment options and decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale) 1 week after the treatment decision has been made. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using questionnaires, 1 week and 3, 6 and 12 months after the treatment decision. Data will be analysed following an intention-to-treat approach using a linear mixed model and taking into account clustering of patients within hospitals.
The Medical Ethical Committee Leiden-Den Haag-Delft (METC-LDD) approved this protocol (NL76563.058.21). The results of this study will be reported in a peer-review journal.
NL9160, NCT05741944.
FreshRSS 