Surgeon Alignment With Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Qualitative Analysis of Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures

Abstract

Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are developed to guide physicians in providing consistent high-quality care. Despite availability of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of distal radius fractures, prior work suggests many patients receive treatment that is misaligned with the CPG. We sought to explore barriers and facilitators of guideline-aligned care for distal radius fractures. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews of a purposive sample of surgeons who treat distal radius fractures. Our interview guide was based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Interviews were transcribed and coded using a deductive analytical approach within the 14 TDF domains. Belief statements underlying similar codes were developed to describe barriers and facilitators of guideline-aligned care. A content analysis was performed to count the frequency of each TDF domain. Results: We interviewed 14 surgeons. The most common TDF domains were beliefs about consequences (110), knowledge (49), and social influences (29). Belief statements representative of barriers of concordance to the CPGs included, “I am more likely to deviate from the CPGs when the CPGs differ from my professional opinion,” which was coded under beliefs about consequences. Similar belief statements were created for each theme within TDF domains. Conclusion: Decision-making for patients with distal radius fractures is driven by beliefs about consequences, knowledge, and social influences. Strategies to address these beliefs in other fields such as including patient factors in a further structured shared decision-making process, developing implementation toolkits as part of the CPG development process, and implementing payment programs may improve CPG alignment.