RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)
General practice perspectives on a bowel cancer screening quality improvement intervention using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
Carol Holden A * , Deborah Turnbull B , Oliver Frank C D and Ian Olver B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide
B School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, South Australia
C Discipline of General Practice, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, South Australia
D Oakden Medical Centre, Adelaide, South Australia
Public Health Research and Practice 31, e30452016 https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp30452016
Published: 8 September 2021
Abstract
Introduction:An understanding of contextual factors that influence whether general practitioners advise their patients to be screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) might guide interventions to increase screening participation from its persistently low rate. We report on the use of a theory-based tool to explore contextual factors that might influence implementation of a novel quality improvement (QI) intervention to increase CRC screening in general practice (CRC-QI). The objective was to identify and incorporate strategies into the intervention that will enable flexible implementation across different practice settings. Study type: A qualitative study to explore contextual facilitators of, and barriers to, the implementation of a novel CRC-QI intervention. Methods: Eighteen staff, from three self-nominated general practices, participated in focus group discussions. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which included constructs relevant to CRC screening in primary care, guided the formative evaluation. Findings were aligned to the CFIR model using a deductive thematic analysis. Results: Contextual facilitators of, and barriers to, the implementation of the CRC-QI intervention were identified in each CFIR domain and CRC-relevant construct. Five consistent themes were identified that potentially influence elements of the CRC-QI intervention: priority setting and incentives, information technology, patient-level barriers, clinical practice, and the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). Participants proposed that incentive payments and NBCSP policy changes (outer-setting strategies) would facilitate organisational change (inner-setting strategies) and the effective implementation of the CRC-QI intervention. Conclusion: There may be an opportunity to better engage general practice in CRC screening via outer-setting constructs that support existing clinical practice. For example, improvements to the National Cancer Screening Registrar and Quality Improvement Incentive – Practice Incentives Program (PIP) could be made without altering the NBCSP design.