Protocol for a qualitative synthesis of barriers and facilitators in implementing guidelines for diagnosis of tuberculosis

Ochodo, Eleanor; Kredo, Tamara; Young, Taryn; Wiysonge, Charles Shey

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013717

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To synthesise and analyse the results in this review, a thematic analysis approach will be used. [28][29][30] This form of approach allows large descriptive evidence to be explored and establish an understanding of the knowledge and attitude of HCPs towards frailty screening in primary care. The different stages of framework synthesis will be followed to synthesise the qualitative data, as detailed below:…”

Section: Data Synthesis and Analysis Planmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge and attitude of healthcare professionals to frailty screening in primary care: a systematic review protocol

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionFrailty is an increasingly common condition in which physiological decline as a result of accumulated deficits renders older people more vulnerable to adverse outcomes. An increasing range of frailty screening programmes have been introduced in primary care to identify frail older people in order to deliver appropriate interventions. However, limited information on the knowledge and attitude of healthcare professionals (HCPs) with respect to frailty screening is known. The aim of this systematic review is to provide evidence on the knowledge and attitude of HCP in terms of frailty screening, and potentially identify barriers and facilitators to frailty screening to improve implementation of frailty screening in primary care.Methods/designA systematic review of qualitative research will be conducted. Databases searched will be MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and Web of Science from January 2001 to August 2019. Methods will be reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Population, interest, context and study design methodology was used to develop inclusion and exclusion criteria with HCPs as population, frailty screening as interest and knowledge or attitude of HCPs to frailty screening as context. Studies with a qualitative methodology or a mixed-method design where the qualitative component is analysed separately will also be included. Quality appraisal will be carried out using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool for qualitative studies. Data will be extracted from each selected study with thematic framework analysis used to synthesise findings.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review does not require ethical approval as primary data will not be collected. The findings will be disseminated at conferences and in a relevant academic journal. This review will assist HCPs and relevant stakeholders to tackle the challenges of frailty screening in primary care.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019159007.

show abstract

Section: Data Synthesis and Analysis Planmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge and attitude of healthcare professionals to frailty screening in primary care: a systematic review protocol

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The protocol of this review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42016039790, and published in a peer-reviewed journal [ 14 ]. Changes to the protocol have been outlined in Additional file 1 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A synthesis of qualitative evidence of barriers and facilitators in implementing guidelines for TB testing in healthcare settings

Karanja,

Mulaku,

Ochodo

2024

Implement Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The suboptimal case notification rates for tuberculosis (TB) globally could partly be due to the poor implementation of TB testing guidelines or policies. We identified, appraised and synthesized qualitative evidence exploring the barriers and facilitators to implementing TB testing guidelines. Methods We searched electronic databases and grey literature and included studies based on predefined inclusion criteria (PROSPERO registered protocol CRD42016039790) until 9th February 2023. We used the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Two authors reviewed the search output, extracted data and assessed methodological quality independently, resolving disagreements by consensus. We used the Supporting the Use of Research Evidence framework to identify themes and analyse and synthesize our data. We applied the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research approach to assess the confidence of the review findings. Results Our search output was 6976 articles, from which we included 25 qualitative studies, mostly from low- and middle-income countries (n=19) and about national guidelines (n=22). All studies were from healthcare settings. Most barriers revolved around health system constraints involving the guidelines (low trust and adherence, ambiguous and poorly developed or adapted guidelines) and poorly resourced and organized health facilities to enable the implementation of the guidelines. Individual-level barriers included low trust and low awareness among recipients and providers of care. Donor dependence was the main socio-political constraint. These barriers were similar across all income settings except poorly resourced health facilities and social and political constraints which were only reported in low- and middle-income settings. The reported facilitators were improved trust and knowledge of guidelines, national leadership support and availability of training tools and opportunities for guidelines across all income settings. We had high confidence in most of the review findings. Conclusion Limited guideline knowledge, trust and adherence related to poorly developed and disseminated guidelines in all income settings and poorly resourced facilities in low- and middle-income countries hinder the implementation of TB testing guidelines. This could be improved by better guideline training and adaptation and resourcing of health facilities. Trial registration The protocol of this review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42016039790, and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

show abstract

“…Thematic synthesis is appropriate where the evidence is likely to be mainly descriptive28 and will enrich our understanding of the individual, system and policy-level MWM-related factors that can affect MWHs’ health in LMICs and their experiences of health risks. We will follow the five stages of the thematic framework analysis to synthesise the data28 33 (see below).…”

Section: Data Synthesis and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical waste management-related factors affecting health and experiences of health risks among medical waste handlers in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol of qualitative studies

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionMedical waste management (MWM)-related factors affecting the health of medical waste handlers (MWHs) and their health risks in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are an important public health concern. Although studies of MWM-related factors and health risks among MWHs in LMICs are available, literature remains undersynthesised and knowledge fragmented. This systematic review will provide a comprehensive synthesis of evidence regarding the individual, system and policy-level MWM-related factors that affect MWHs’ health and their experiences of health risks in LMICs.Methods and analysisAll qualitative studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2021 with full texts available and accessible will be included in the review. Seven specific electronic databases (eg, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL, ProQuest and PsycINFO) will be searched. Two authors will review the citations and full texts, extract data and complete the quality appraisal independently. A third reviewer will check discrepancies when a consensus cannot be reached on differences between the two reviewers. Data extraction will be conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute standardised data extraction form for qualitative research. The quality of articles will be assessed using a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Results from eligible articles will be synthesised into a set of findings using the thematic framework analysis approach and will be reported according to the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research statement.Ethics and disseminationThis review is based on published articles, which does not require ethical approval because there is no collection of primary data. Findings from this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant public health conferences. This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020226851.

show abstract

Protocol for a qualitative synthesis of barriers and facilitators in implementing guidelines for diagnosis of tuberculosis

Cited by 6 publications

References 28 publications

Knowledge and attitude of healthcare professionals to frailty screening in primary care: a systematic review protocol

Knowledge and attitude of healthcare professionals to frailty screening in primary care: a systematic review protocol

A synthesis of qualitative evidence of barriers and facilitators in implementing guidelines for TB testing in healthcare settings

Medical waste management-related factors affecting health and experiences of health risks among medical waste handlers in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol of qualitative studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About