Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32334641›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2020

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of epilepsy self-management programs: a systematic review using qualitative evidence synthesis methods.

Allison A Lewinski, Abigail Shapiro, Jennifer M Gierisch, Karen M Goldstein, Dan V Blalock, Matthew W Luedke, Adelaide M Gordon, Hayden B Bosworth, Connor Drake, Jeffrey D Lewis and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04587336 (Tailored Approaches to Reduce Distress and Improve Self-Management for Veterans With Diabetes), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04587336 completednot on this map

Tailored Approaches to Reduce Distress and Improve Self-Management for Veterans With Diabetes (TARDIS) - Survey & Qualitative Interview

TypeobservationalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2020 to 2025Enrolled225ConditionsDiabetes, Diabetes Distress, Self-Management, VeteranArmsCognitive Interview, Baseline Survey, Qualitative Interviews
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Allison A LewinskiDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. allison.lewinski@duke.edu.
Abigail ShapiroDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Jennifer M GierischDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Karen M GoldsteinDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Dan V BlalockDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Matthew W LuedkeDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Adelaide M GordonDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Hayden B BosworthDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Connor DrakeDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Jeffrey D LewisDepartment of Neurology, Uniformed Services University School of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Saurabh R SinhaDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Aatif M HusainDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Tung T TranDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Megan G Van NoordUniversity of California at Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
John W WilliamsDurham Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Peer Support for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Female VeteransIK2HX001540 · VA · DURHAM VA MEDICAL CENTER · PI GOLDSTEIN, KAREN M. · 2015 to 2020
–
HSR&D Senior Research Career Scientist AwardIK6HX003161 · VA · DURHAM VA MEDICAL CENTER · PI Hayden B Bosworth · 2020 to 2026
–
HSRD VA CIN 13-410HSRD VA ESP 09-010HSRD VA IK2 HX001540HSRD VA IK6 HX003161
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpilepsy affects nearly 50 million people worldwide. Self-management is critical for individuals with epilepsy in order to maintain optimal physical, cognitive, and emotional health. Implementing and adopting a self-management program requires considering many factors at the person, program, and systems levels. We conducted a systematic review of qualitative and mixed-methods studies to identify facilitators and barriers that impact implementation and adoption of self-management programs for adults with epilepsy.

methodsWe used established systematic review methodologies for qualitative and mixed-methods studies. We included studies addressing facilitators (i.e., factors that aided) or barriers (i.e., factors that impeded) to implementation and adoption of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. We conducted a narrative thematic synthesis to identify facilitators and barriers.

resultsThe literature search identified 2700 citations; 13 studies met eligibility criteria. Our synthesis identified five themes that categorize facilitators and barriers to successful implementation epilepsy self-management: (1) relevance, intervention content that facilitates acquisition of self-management skills; (2) personalization, intervention components that account for the individual's social, physical, and environmental characteristics; (3) intervention components, components and dosing of the intervention; (4) technology considerations, considerations that account for individual's use, familiarity with, and ownership of technology; and (5) clinician interventionist, role and preparation of the individual who leads intervention. We identified facilitators in 11 of the 13 studies and barriers in 11 of the 13 studies and classified these by social-ecological level (i.e., patient/caregiver, program, site/system).

conclusionIdentification of facilitators and barriers at multiple levels provides insight into disease-specific factors that influence implementation and adoption of self-management programs for individuals with epilepsy. Our findings indicate that involving individuals with epilepsy and their caregivers in intervention development, and then tailoring intervention content during the intervention, can help ensure the content is relevant to intervention participants. Our findings also indicate the role of the clinician (i.e., the individual who provides self-management education) is important to intervention implementation, and key issues with clinicians were identified as barriers and opportunities for improvement. Overall, our findings have practical value for those seeking to implement and adopt self-management interventions for epilepsy and other chronic illnesses. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number is CRD42018098604.

Indexed as

EpilepsySelf-ManagementAdultHumansEpilepsyQualitative researchSelf-management

Identifiers

PMID32334641
PMCPMC7183113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.