Variations in factors associated with healthcare providers’ intention to engage in interprofessional shared decision making in home care: results of two cross-sectional surveys

Abstract

Background: DOLCE (Improving Decision making On Location of Care with the frail Elderly and their caregivers) was a post-intervention clustered randomised trial (cRT) to assess the effect of training home care teams on interprofessional shared decision-making (IP-SDM). Alongside the cRT, we sought to monitor healthcare providers' level of behavioural intention to engage in an IP-SDM approach and to identify factors associated with this intention. Methods: We conducted two cross-sectional surveys in the province of Quebec, Canada, one each at cRT entry and exit. Healthcare providers (e.g. nurses, occupational therapists and social workers) in the 16 participating intervention and control sites self-completed an identical paper-based questionnaire at entry and exit. Informed by the Integrated model for explaining healthcare professionals' clinical behaviour by Godin et al. (2008), we assessed their behavioural intention to engage in IP-SDM to support older adults and caregivers of older adults with cognitive impairment to make health-related housing decisions. We also assessed psychosocial variables underlying their behavioural intention and collected sociodemographic data. We used descriptive statistics and linear mixed models to account for clustering.

Use of the CPD-REACTION Questionnaire to Evaluate Continuing Professional Development Activities for Health Professionals: Systematic Review

“…There were no exclusive qualitative studies ( Table 1 ). Most study designs were mixed methods (24/52, 46%) [ 8 , 9 , 12 , 18 , 23 , 26 , 35 , 42 ,​ 43 , 45 , 47 , 50 , 55 , 56 , 61 , 64 , 67 , 71 , 72 ], followed by cross-sectional studies (9/52, 17%) [ 22 , 32 , 39 , 42 , 56 , 59 ].…”

“…( Table 2 ). In most studies, participants in CPD activities consisted of interprofessional groups (30/52, 60%) [ 7 , 9 - 11 , 19 , 21 , 27 , 28 , 31 , 35 , 37 , 41 , 43 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 55 - 61 , 63 , 64 , 66 - 68 ]. Professions included nurses (5/52, 10%) [ 26 , 29 , 30 , 48 , 54 ], physicians (4/52, 8%) [ 38 , 39 , 49 , 52 ], social workers or other health professionals, namely occupational therapists, physiotherapists, dietitians, behavioral counselors, nutritionists, health researchers (4/52, 8%) [ 23 - 25 , 34 , 36 ], specialist physicians (3/52, 6%) [ 32 , 40 , 65 ], and pharmacists (2/52, 4%) [ 22 , 42 ].…”

“…The evaluations targeted 39 different clinical behaviors [ 7 - 12 , 19 - 70 ]. Thematic analysis showed that 7 (18%) out of the 39 pertained to shared decision-making [ 9 , 35 , 50 , 54 , 56 , 64 , 67 ] and 5 pertained to decision aids or toolkit implementation [ 53 , 60 , 61 , 63 , 66 ] ( Table 3 ).…”

“…Although none of the studies fully met all MMAT criteria, none were rated “no” for any criteria ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ). In the 4 quantitative randomized trials, only the criterion “randomization appropriately performed” was met by all 4 studies [ 10 , 50 , 54 , 63 ], and in all 17 mixed method studies, only the criterion “adequate rationale for using a mixed methods design” was met. In all the design groups, all the criteria not rated “yes” were rated “not sure.”…”

Antecedents of Consumer Food Waste Reduction Behavior: Psychological and Financial Concerns through the Lens of the Theory of Interpersonal Behavior

“…Habit (HAB) was considered as the main construction to influence e-waste to recycle behavior [ 73 ]; significantly influencing recycling intention towards e-waste [ 74 ]. Habit as a psychological factor that influences intention [ 75 ] has a considerable impact on behavior [ 76 ], predicts behavior [ 77 ], and also influences pro-environmental behavior, [ 68 ]. In addition, there is a positive influence on both the intention and behavior to reduce waste [ 71 ] and it has been found to be a significant predictor of food waste reduction behavior [ 50 , 72 , 78 ].…”