↓ Skip to main content

Collaborating with front-line healthcare professionals: the clinical and cost effectiveness of a theory based approach to the implementation of a national guideline

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Collaborating with front-line healthcare professionals: the clinical and cost effectiveness of a theory based approach to the implementation of a national guideline
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12913-014-0648-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie Taylor, Rebecca Lawton, Sally Moore, Joyce Craig, Beverley Slater, Alison Cracknell, John Wright, Mohammed A Mohammed

Abstract

BackgroundClinical guidelines are an integral part of healthcare. Whilst much progress has been made in ensuring that guidelines are well developed and disseminated, the gap between routine clinical practice and current guidelines often remains wide. A key reason for this gap is that implementation of guidelines typically requires a change in the behaviour of healthcare professionals ¿ but the behaviour change component is often overlooked. We adopted the Theoretical Domains Framework Implementation (TDFI) approach for supporting behaviour change required for the uptake of a national patient safety guideline to reduce the risk of feeding through misplaced nasogastric tubes.MethodsThe TDFI approach was used in a pre-post study in three NHS hospitals with a fourth acting as a control (with usual care and no TDFI). The target behavior identified for change was to increase the use of pH testing as the first line method for checking the position of a nasogastric tube. Repeat audits were undertaken in each hospital following intervention implementation. We used Zou¿s modified Poisson regression approach with robust standard errors to estimate risk ratios for the use of pH testing. The projected return on investment (ROI) was also calculated.ResultsFollowing intervention implementation, the use of pH first line increased significantly across intervention hospitals [risk ratio (95%CI) ranged from 3.1 (1.14 to8.43) p¿<¿.05, to 8.14 (3.06 to21.67) p¿<¿.001] compared to the control hospital, which remained unchanged [risk ratio (CI)¿=¿.77 (.47-1.26) p¿=¿.296]. The estimated savings and costs in the first year were £2.56 million and £1.41 respectively, giving an ROI of 82%, and this was projected to increase to 270% over five years.ConclusionThe TDFI approach improved the uptake of a patient safety guideline across three hospitals. The TDFI approach is clinically and cost effective in comparison to the usual practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Ecuador 1 1%
Unknown 86 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 20 23%
Unknown 21 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 22%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Psychology 9 10%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 22 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2016.
All research outputs
#4,785,791
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,254
of 7,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,292
of 358,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#31
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 358,267 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.