https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/efetch.fcgi?db=pubmed&id=34266414&retmode=xml&tool=Litmetric&email=readroberts32@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09 342664142022022320240402
1471-23692212021Jul15BMC nephrologyBMC NephrolRenal recipients' knowledge and self-efficacy during first year after implementing an evidence based educational intervention as routine care at the transplantation clinic.26526526510.1186/s12882-021-02468-xFollowing an implementation plan based on dynamic dialogue between researchers and clinicians, this study implemented an evidence-based patient education program (tested in an RCT) into routine care at a clinical transplant center. The aim of this study was to investigate renal recipients' knowledge and self-efficacy during first year the after the intervention was provided in an everyday life setting.The study has a longitudinal design. The sample consisted of 196 renal recipients. Measurement points were 5 days (baseline), 2 months (T1), 6 months (T2), and one-year post transplantation (T3). Outcome measures were post-transplant knowledge, self-efficacy, and self-perceived general health.No statistically significant changes were found from baseline to T1, T2, and T3. Participants' levels of knowledge and self-efficacy were high prior to the education program and did not change throughout the first year post transplantation.Renal recipients self-efficacy and insight in post-transplant aspects seem to be more robust when admitted to the hospital for transplantation compared to baseline observations in the RCT study. This may explain why the implemented educational intervention did not lead to the same positive increase in outcome measures as in the RCT. This study supports that replicating clinical interventions in real-life settings may provide different results compared to results from RCT's. In order to gain a complete picture of the impacts of an implemented intervention, it is vital also to evaluate results after implementing findings from RCT-studies into everyday practice.© 2021. The Author(s).UrstadKristin HjorthaugKHFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Quality and Health Technology, University of Stavanger, 4036, Stavanger, Norway. Kristin.h.urstad@uis.no.WahlAstrid KlopstadAKFaculty of Medicine, Department of Health Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.MoumTorbjørnTFaculty of Medicine, Department of Behavioural Sciences in Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.EngebretsenEivindEFaculty of Medicine, Department of Health Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.AndersenMarit HelenMHFaculty of Medicine, Department of Health Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.engJournal Article20210715
EnglandBMC Nephrol1009677931471-2369IMAdultConsumer Health InformationFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansKidney Failure, ChronicpsychologysurgeryKidney TransplantationeducationpsychologyLongitudinal StudiesMalePatient Education as TopicPerioperative PeriodeducationpsychologyQuality of LifeSelf EfficacyImplementationPatient educationRenal transplantationNo competing interests.
2021330202163020217165352021717602022224602021715epublish34266414PMC828400310.1186/s12882-021-02468-x10.1186/s12882-021-02468-xBertelsen KH, Rasmussen K, Ludvigsen MS, Finderup J. Experiences of recipients and living donors the first three days after kidney transplantation. J. Renal Care. 2015;41:195–201. doi: 10.1111/jorc.12113.10.1111/jorc.1211325643643Boaz A, Morgan M. Working to establish “normality” post transplant: a qualitative study of kidney transplant patients. Chron. Illness. 2014;10:247–58. doi: 10.1177/1742395313504789.10.1177/174239531350478924072700Gill P. Stressors and coping mechanisms in live-related renal transplantation. J. Clin. Nursing. 2012;21:1622–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04085.x.10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04085.x22594387Urstad KH, Andersen MH, Øyen O, Moum T, Wahl AK. Patients’ level of knowledge measured five days after kidney transplantation. Clin. Transplant. 2011;25:646–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2010.01355.x.10.1111/j.1399-0012.2010.01355.x21077953Urstad KH, Wahl AK, Andersen MH, Øyen O, Fagermoen MS. Renal recipients’ educational experiences in the early post-operative phase—a qualitative study. Scand. J. Caring Sci. 2012;26:635–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.00972.x.10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.00972.x22417055Young BA. Health literacy in nephrology: why is it important? Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2013;62:3–6. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.04.003.10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.04.00323773837Dageforde LA, Cavanaugh KL. Health literacy: emerging evidence and applications in kidney disease care. Adv. Chron. Kidney Dis. 2013;20:311–19. doi: 10.1053/j.ackd.2013.04.005.10.1053/j.ackd.2013.04.005PMC376757223809283Urstad KH, Andersen MH, Øyen O, Moum T, Wahl AK. The effect of an educational intervention for renal recipients: a randomized controlled trial. Clin. Tra nsplant. 2012;26:E246–E53. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2012.01666.x.10.1111/j.1399-0012.2012.01666.x22686948Miller TA, DiMatteo MR. Communication, in: B.A. Bensadon (Ed.) Psychology and Geriatrics. Academic Press; 2015.Young YA, Tordoff AJ, Smith A. What do patients want? ‘Tailoring medicines information to meet patients’’ needs. Res Soc Admin Pharm. 2016;26:S1551–7411.27818214Svavarsdóttir MH, Sigurdardottir AK, Steinsbekk A. What is a good educator? A qualitative study on the perspective of individuals with coronary heart disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2016;15:513–52.26588939Driscoll A, Davidson P, Clark R, et al. Tailoring consumer resources to enhance self-care in chronic heart failure. Aust Crit Care. 2009;22:133–40.19581110Burton JH, Marshall JM, Munro P, et al. Rehabilitation and transition after lung transplantation in children. Transplant Proc. 2009;41:296–99.19249539Clark N, Lachance L, Milanovich AF, et al. Characteristics of successful asthma programs. Public Health Rep. 2009;124:797–805.PMC277394219894421Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS. Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull. 2007;133:673–93.17592961Engebretsen E, Andersen MH, Urstad KH, Wahl AK. Theory and Methodology in International Comparative Classroom Studies. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk; 2014. Action research in implementation and evaluation. Outline of a study of a training programme for kidney transplant recipients; pp. 256–66.Graham ID, Tetroe J. Some theoretical underpinnings of knowledge translation. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2007;14(11):936–41. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2007.07.004.10.1197/j.aem.2007.07.00417967955McKibbon KA, Lokker C, Wilczynski NL, Ciliska D, Dobbins M, Davis DA, Haynes RB, Straus SE. A cross-sectional study of the number and frequency of terms used to refer to knowledge translation in a body of health literature in 2006: a Tower of Babel? Implement. Sci. 2010;12:5–16.PMC283460021080976von Thiele Schwarz U, Hasson H, Lindfors P. Applying a fidelity framework to adaptations in an occupational health intervention. Work. 2015;51:195–203. doi: 10.3233/WOR-141840.10.3233/WOR-14184024594534Backer TE. Finding the balance: program fidelity and adaptation in substance abuse prevention: a state-of-the-art review. Rockville: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; 2002. https://www.csun.edu/sites/default/files/FindingBalance1.pdf. (accessed 7 February 2020).Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Hansen WB, Walsh J, Falco M. Quality of implementation: developing measures crucial to understanding the diffusion of preventive interventions. Health Edu. Res. 2005;20:308–13. doi: 10.1093/her/cyg134.10.1093/her/cyg13415522898Carroll C, Patterson M, Wood S, Booth A, Rick J, Balain S. A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implement. Sci. 2007;2:2–40. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-2-40.10.1186/1748-5908-2-40PMC221368618053122Greenhalgh T, Wieringa S. Is it time to drop the “knowledge translation” metaphor? A critical literature review. J. R. Soc. Med. 2011;104(12):501–9. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110285.10.1258/jrsm.2011.110285PMC324152222179293Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82:581–629. doi: 10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x.10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.xPMC269018415595944Ward V, House A, Hamer S. Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action: a thematic analysis of the literature. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy. 2009;14(3):156–64. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.008120.10.1258/jhsrp.2009.008120PMC293350519541874Davies H, Nutley S, Walter I. Why “knowledge transfer” is misconceived for applied social research. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy. 2008;13(3):188–90. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008055.10.1258/jhsrp.2008.00805518573770Lillehagen I, Andersen MH, Urstad KH, Engebretsen E. How does a new patient education programme for renal recipients become situated and adapted when implemented in the daily teaching practice in a university hospital? An ethnographic observation study. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e023005. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023005.10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023005PMC625442530478114Andersen MH, Wahl AK, Engebretsen E, Urstad KH. Implementing a tailored education programme: renal transplant recipients’ experiences. J. Renal Care. 2019;45(2):111–19. doi: 10.1111/jorc.12273.10.1111/jorc.1227330920177Urstad KH, Wahl AK, Engebretsen E, Larsen MH, Vidnes TK, Stenwig AGK, Simensen ØW, Nordli A, Reisæter AV, Andersen MH. Implementation of a new patient education programme for renal transplant recipients. J. Renal Care. 2018;44:106–14. doi: 10.1111/jorc.12236.10.1111/jorc.1223629460501Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Principles of educational outreach (“academic detailing”) to improve clinical decision making. JAMA. 1990;263(4):549–56. doi: 10.1001/jama.1990.03440040088034.10.1001/jama.1990.034400400880342104640Bandura A. Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press; 1977.Katz J, Wandersman A, Goodman RM, Griffin S, Wilson DK, Schillaci M. Updating the FORECAST formative evaluation approach and some implications for ameliorating theory failure, implementation failure, and evaluation failure. Eval. Prog. Plan. 2013;39:42–50. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.03.001.10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.03.001PMC401820023624204Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized self-efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnson M, (Eds.). Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio, Causal and Control Beliefs. Nfer-Nelson, Windsor, 1995, pp. 35–37Røysamb E, Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Norwegian version of the general perceived self-efficacy scale. 1999. www.userpage.fu-berlin.de/health/selfscal.htm. Accessed 7 Feb 2020.Cunny KA, Perri M III. Single-item vs multiple-item measures of health-related quality of life. Psychol Rep. 1991;69(1):127–30.1961779Loge JH, Kaasa S, Hjermstad MJ, Kvien TK. Translation and performance of the Norwegian SF-36 Health Survey in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. I. Data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability, and construct validity. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1069–76.9817124US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network https://srtr.transplant.hrsa.gov/annual_reports/2016_ADR_Preview.aspx. Accessed 7 Feb 2020.Tomlinson M, Rotheram-Borus MJ, Swartz L, Tsai AC. Scaling up mHealth: where is the evidence? PLoS Med. 2013;10:e1001382.PMC357054023424286Theobald S, Brandes N, Gyapong M, El-Saharty S, Proctor E, Diaz T, Wanji S, Elloker S, Raven J, Elsey H, Bharal S, Pelletier D, Peters DH. Implementation research: new imperatives and opportunities in global health. The Lancet. 2018;392(1). 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32205-0. Epub 2018 Oct 9.30314860Wray Advances in the anesthetic management of solid organ transplantation. Adv. Anesth. 2017;35:95–117. doi: 10.1016/j.aan.2017.07.005.10.1016/j.aan.2017.07.00529103578Baker RJ, Mark PB, Patel RK, et al. Renal association clinical practice guideline in post-operative care in the kidney transplant recipient. BMC Nephrol. 2017;18:174. doi: 10.1186/s12882-017-0553-2.10.1186/s12882-017-0553-2PMC545508028571571Nowacki M, Nazarewski Ł, Kloskowski T, Tyloch D, Pokrywczyńska M, Pietkun K, Drewa T. Novel surgical techniques, regenerative medicine, tissue engineering and innovative immunosuppression in kidney transplantation. Archives of Medical Science. 2016;12(5):1158–73.PMC501659427695507D’Egidio V, Mannocci A, Ciaccio D, Sestili C, Cocchiara RA, Del Cimmuto A, La Torre G. Return to work after kidney transplant: a systematic review, Occup Med. 2019;69(6):412–8.31394573Thompson D. Replication of Randomized, Controlled Trials Using Real-World Data: What Could Go Wrong?. Value in Health; 2021;24(1):112–5.33431143Yan L, Yan X, Tan Y, Sun SX. Shared Minds: How Patients Use Collaborative Information Sharing via Social Media Platforms. Prod Oper Manag. 2019;28:9–26. doi: 10.1111/poms.12895.10.1111/poms.12895Tan SSL, Goonawardene N. Internet health information seeking and the patient-physician relationship: a systematic review. J Med Int Res. 2017;19(1):e9.PMC529029428104579Sundell K, Beelmann A, Hasson H, von Thiele Schwarz U. Novel programs, international adoptions, or contextual adaptations? Meta-analytical results from German and Swedish intervention research. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2015 doi: 10.1080/15374416.2015.1020540.10.1080/15374416.2015.102054025864716Hall GE, Hord SM. Implementing change: patterns, principles, potholes. New York: Allyn & Bacon; 2001.Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655.10.1136/bmj.a1655PMC276903218824488Niedermann K, Fransen J, Knols R, Uebelhart D. Gap between short- and long-term effects of patient education in rheumatoid arthritis patients: A systematic review. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 2004;51:388–398. doi: 10.1002/art.20399.10.1002/art.2039915188324