Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research
Date Submitted: Nov 30, 2023
Date Accepted: Mar 15, 2024
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Barriers to Implementing RN-driven Clinical Decision Support for Antibiotic Stewardship: A Retrospective Analysis using CFIR
ABSTRACT
Background:
Up to 50% of antibiotic prescriptions for upper respiratory infections (URIs) are inappropriate. Clinical decision support (CDS) systems to mitigate unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions have been implemented into electronic health records (EHR) but their use by providers has been limited.
Objective:
We adapted a CDS-based intervention for registered nurses (RN), consisting of triage to identify lower-acuity URI patients followed by CDS-guided RN visits. It was implemented in February 2022 as a randomized controlled stepped-wedge trial in 43 primary and urgent care practices within four academic health systems in New York, Wisconsin, and Utah.
Methods:
We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to characterize the initial barriers. Clinical workflows and triage-template utilization in the first year of implementation were collected via chart review as well as study staff and site personnel interviews.
Results:
Barriers were identified within all implementation domains. The strongest barriers were found in the outer setting, with those factors trickling down to impact the inner setting. Local conditions driven by COVID-19 served as one of the strongest barriers, impacting attitudes among practice staff and ultimately contributing to a work infrastructure characterized by staff changes, RN shortages and turnover, and competing responsibilities. Policies and laws regarding RN scope-of-practice varied by state and institutional application of those laws, with some allowing more RN clinical autonomy. This necessitated different study procedures at each study site to meet practice requirements, increasing innovation complexity. Similarly, institutional policies led to varying levels of compatibility with existing triage, rooming, and documentation workflows. These workflow conflicts were compounded by limited available resources, as well as an implementation climate of optional participation, few participation incentives, and thus low relative priority compared to other clinical duties.
Conclusions:
Even in a relatively straightforward clinical workflow, workflow differences appreciably impacted intervention adoption. When implementing a system-wide clinical-care intervention, considerations must be made for variability in culture and workflows at the state, health system, practice, and individual levels. Clinical Trial: Clinical Trials Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/, (NCT02465931).
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.