Frameworks on self-management support for chronic disease: a multi-country qualitative study of the implementation process
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Self-management support (SMS) is a comprehensive approach to chronic disease management where healthcare professionals and the wider healthcare system aim to enable people with chronic disease to manage their health and wellbeing. National and state-level health systems have produced SMS frameworks which propose changes at patient, provider, and organisational levels of the healthcare system. While the frameworks hold a lot of potential to reduce the burden of chronic disease, the process of implementing these frameworks is not yet understood.Methods: A grey literature search identified 8 SMS frameworks published between 2008 and 2018 within Australia, Canada, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Implementation leads of these frameworks were invited to participate as key informants in a qualitative study of framework implementation. Semi-structured telephone interviews were carried out with 6 key informants, representing 3 health systems. The Multiple Streams/Critical Juncture Approach to Implementation (1) was used as a theoretical lens in a thematic analysis of the interviews.Results: The process of implementation was influenced by policy streams affecting earlier policy stages including challenges around competing proactive versus reactive healthcare approaches; ambiguity in terminology of SMS; and an uncertain political environment where priorities and structures for implementation continued to change over time. Adapting plans in line with health service priorities and the continued input of patients and professionals, at the centre of SMS, were considered key to advancing implementation.Discussions: The findings suggest that policy stages are not discrete and that implementation is influenced by factors affecting agenda setting and policy formulation. Implementation of SMS was viewed as a long-term process. Implementation requires long-term mechanisms of communication across levels of the health system and deliverables within the health system to sustain support for the policy. Conclusions: SMS framework implementation can be advanced through an adaptive approach to SMS which is guided by the input of key stakeholders and is underpinned by long-term health system structures.Lessons learned: Similarities in the challenges and enablers across health systems suggests that learning across countries may help to advance the implementation of SMS frameworks though findings need to be considered within the context of each health system.Limitations: Three health systems are represented in this study and so this account of implementation may not apply to implementation of SMS frameworks in other countries.Suggestions for future research:Further research is needed to understand the perspective of people with chronic disease to identify the courses of action that should be prioritized to best meet their needs. Research can also explore the optimal structures which facilitate long-term communication across levels of the health system. 1. Howlett M. Moving policy implementation theory forward: A multiple streams/critical juncture approach. Public Policy and Administration. 2019;34(4):405-430.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,038 | 0,042 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,013 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».