Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36121842›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Understanding factors influencing uptake and sustainable use of the PINCER intervention at scale: A qualitative evaluation using Normalisation Process Theory.

Libby Laing, Nde-Eshimuni Salema, Mark Jeffries, Azwa Shamsuddin, Aziz Sheikh, Antony Chuter, Justin Waring, Anthony Avery, Richard N Keers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Libby LaingLifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2930-9311
Nde-Eshimuni SalemaLifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Mark JeffriesDivision of Pharmacy and Optometry, Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Azwa ShamsuddinFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Hull, Hull, United Kingdom.
Aziz SheikhUsher Institute, Edinburgh Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Antony ChuterHaywards Heath, West Sussex, United Kingdom.
Justin WaringSchool of Social Policy, Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Anthony AveryLifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7591-4438
Richard N KeersDivision of Pharmacy and Optometry, Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7854-8154
University of Nottingham · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBHaywards Heath Hospital · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of Hull · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMedication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The pharmacist-led IT-based intervention to reduce clinically important medication errors (PINCER) has demonstrated improvements in primary care medication safety, and whilst now the subject of national roll-out its optimal and sustainable use across health contexts has not been fully explored. As part of a qualitative evaluation we aimed to identify factors influencing successful adoption, embedding and sustainable use of PINCER across primary care settings in England, UK.

methodsSemi-structured face-to-face or telephone interviews, including follow-up interviews and an online survey were conducted with professionals knowledgeable of PINCER. Interview recruitment targeted four early adopter regions; the survey was distributed nationally. Initial data analysis was inductive, followed by analysis using a coding framework. A deductive matrix approach was taken to map the framework to the Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). Themes were then identified.

resultsFifty participants were interviewed, 18 participated in a follow-up interview. Eighty-one general practices and three Clinical Commissioning Groups completed the survey. Four themes were identified and interpreted within the relevant NPT construct: Awareness & Perceptions (Coherence), Receptivity to PINCER (Cognitive Participation), Engagement [Collective Action] and Reflections & Adaptations (Reflexive Monitoring). Variability was identified in how PINCER awareness was raised and how staff worked to operationalise the intervention. Facilitators for use included stakeholder investment, favourable evidence, inclusion in policy, incentives, fit with individual and organisational goals and positive experiences. Barriers included lack of understanding, capacity concerns, operational difficulties and the impact of COVID-19. System changes such as adding alerts on clinical systems were indicative of embedding and continued use.

conclusionsThe NPT helped understand motives behind engagement and the barriers and facilitators towards sustainable use. Optimising troubleshooting support and encouraging establishments to adopt an inclusive approach to intervention adoption and utilisation could help accelerate uptake and help establish ongoing sustainable use.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PracticeEnglandHumansMedication ErrorsPharmacists

Identifiers

PMID36121842
PMCPMC9484679
OpenAlexW4296324734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.