ArticleBMJ open2025
Determinants and implementation strategies to implement a reflection method for guideline-based informal caregiving in community nursing in the Netherlands: a mixed-method study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aims to identify key determinants and strategies for effectively implementing a reflection method to support adequate use of the 'Informal Care' guideline within community nursing. The SPARK (Self & Peer Assessment to Reflect on Quality Standards) reflection method, developed in an earlier participatory design-based study, is a structured group reflection approach designed to help nurses and nursing assistants reflect on and apply guideline recommendations in daily practice.
designA mixed method study.
settingSix community care organisations in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS AND
interventionsThis mixed-method study collected qualitative data through observations and video recordings of group meetings with community nurses, nursing assistants and a patient representative, alongside quantitative questionnaires. This project included design and test group meetings to develop and evaluate prototypes of the reflection method. Observations were discussed, and video recordings were thematically analysed. The Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations questionnaire was used to identify key determinants for effective implementation. The questionnaire results were analysed descriptively, using the Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework to present preliminary determinants for validation. Implementation strategies were then selected in a group meeting. Based on this input, the research group operationalised the selected implementation strategies.
resultsTwenty-nine determinants for implementing the reflection method were identified across seven TICD domains, including barriers such as limited support, knowledge and time, and facilitators such as team collaboration and prevention of caregiver overload. Based on these findings, three implementation strategies, namely knowledge enhancement, coaching development and leadership strengthening, were formulated to support integration into community nursing practice.
conclusionThis study identified key determinants and strategies for implementing a reflection method in community nursing. While several determinants align with existing literature, context-specific determinants related to the heterogeneous group of registered nurses and certified nursing assistants also emerged. Strengthening guideline knowledge, coaching competencies and leadership is essential for sustainable, guideline-based reflection in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.