Barriers to and Enablers of Implementation of High-Value Interventions by Renal Pharmacists: A Qualitative Study Informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACTBackground: Previous studies have shown that patients with chronic kidney disease who are followed by a renal clinical pharmacist have improved clinical outcomes. In 2016, a consensus list of quality indicator drug therapy problems (QI-DTPs) was developed by renal clinical pharmacists to help prioritize which renal patients should receive interventions. Before QI-DTP interventions can be implemented in clinical practice, barriers to and enablers of their use need to be identified, to allow development of strategies to overcome the barriers and apply the enablers.Objective: To identify modifiable barriers to and enablers of implementation of renal QI-DTP interventions by renal clinical pharmacists.Methods: In this exploratory qualitative descriptive study, one-on-one, semistructured, audio-recorded telephone interviews were conducted with renal clinical pharmacists to identify the barriers to and enablers of implementation of renal QI-DTP interventions. The interviews consisted of questions developed according to the Theoretical Domains Framework.Results: Interviews were conducted with 13 renal pharmacists from across Canada. The main barriers to implementation of renal QI-DTP interventions that participants identified were knowledge gaps, prioritization, and nephrologist acceptance. The main enablers identified were training, colleague support, and better patient care.Conclusion: Three barriers to and three enablers of implementation of renal QI-DTP interventions were identified. These barriers and enablers can be used to help with pharmacist education and to optimize the care that pharmacists provide to renal patients.RÉSUMÉContexte : Des études précédentes démontrent une amélioration des résultats cliniques de patients souffrant d’une maladie rénale chronique, qui sont suivis par un pharmacien clinicien en néphrologie. En 2016, des pharmaciens cliniciens en néphrologie ont mis au point une liste consensuelle des indicateurs de qualité des problèmes de pharmacothérapie (QI-DTP) pour les aider à prioriser les patients souffrant d’une insuffisance rénale, qui doivent subir une intervention. Avant de mettre en place ces QI-DTP en pratique clinique, on doit déterminer les éléments qui entravent et facilitent leur utilisation pour pouvoir élaborer des stratégies visant à surmonter les obstacles et à appliquer les éléments facilitateurs.Objectif :Déterminer les éléments modifiables qui entravent et facilitent la mise en place des QI-DTP par les pharmaciens cliniciens en néphrologie lors d’interventions rénales.Méthodes : Dans cette étude exploratoire, descriptive et qualitative, des entretiens téléphoniques individuels, semi structurés et enregistrés ont été menés auprès de pharmaciens cliniciens en néphrologie pour determiner les éléments qui entravent et facilitent la mise en place de QI-DTP lors d’interventions rénales. Les entretiens consistaient en des questions préparées selon le Theoretical Domains Framework.Résultats : Les entretiens ont été menés auprès de 13 pharmaciens en néphrologie de partout au Canada. Les principaux éléments entravant la mise en place de QI-DTP lors d’interventions rénales déterminées par les participants étaient : le manque de connaissances, la priorisation et l’acception des néphrologues. Les principaux éléments facilitant la tâche étaient : la formation, le soutien des collègues et de meilleurs soins offerts aux patients.Conclusion : Trois éléments entravant et trois éléments facilitant la mise en place de QI-DTP lors d’interventions rénales ont été déterminés. Ils peuvent être utilisés pour contribuer à la formation du pharmacien et pour optimiser les soins offerts aux patients qui souffrent d’insuffisance rénale.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".