RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Factors Influencing the Implementing Readiness of Shared Medical Appointments in China’s Primary Healthcare Institutions: A Mixed-Method Study Utilizing Qualitative Comparative Analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.06.19.24309131
DO 10.1101/2024.06.19.24309131
A1 Yang, Wei
A1 Liu, Lingrui
A1 Chen, Jiajia
A1 Mao, Run
A1 Yang, Tao
A1 Linghu, Lang
A1 Huang, Lieyu
A1 Xu, Dong (Roman)
A1 Cai, Yiyuan
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/21/2024.06.19.24309131.abstract
AB Background and Objective Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a mounting public health concern in China, home to the largest number of patients with diabetes globally. A primary challenge has been the integration of high-quality chronic disease services, with poor outcomes and inefficient health management intensifying the disease burden. Shared Medical Appointments (SMAs) offer a promising solution, yet evidence of their practical application in resource-limited settings like China’s primary healthcare institutions is scant. This study aims to evaluate the organizational readiness for change (ORC) in implementing SMA services in Guizhou province’s primary healthcare institutions and to identify determinants of high-level ORC to foster implementation success.Methods This study employed a mixed-method approach. The validated Chinese version of the Workplace Readiness Questionnaire (WRQ-CN) was used to assess the ORC status across 12 institutions participating in the SMART pilot trial. A Normalization Process Theory (NPT) -guided qualitative interview and quantitative survey were used to collect the conditions. Data analysis encompassed standardized descriptive statistics, Spearman correlation analysis, and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to discern condition variables and configurations that are favorable to high-level ORC.Results The study engaged 70 institutional participants, including administrators, clinicians, and public health workers. The median ORC score was 105.20 (101.23-107.33). We identified 12 condition variables through the interview and survey. The Spearman correlation analysis highlighted a moderate correlation between Specific tasks and responsibilities (r=0.393, p=0.206) and Key participants (r=0.316, p=0.317) with ORC. QCA also revealed these condition configurations and pathways that collectively align with heightened ORC, accentuating the pivotal role of key participants.Conclusions This study unveiled a spectrum of dynamic conditions and pathways affecting ORC, which are consistent with the NPT-based theoretical steps. They were essential for attaining high-level ORC in rolling out health service innovations like the SMART study, especially in resource-limited settings.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NNSFC) [grant 72164005].Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Ethics Committee of Guizhou Medical University Ethics Approval Document 2023 (4) https://kdocs.cn/l/cjoKKtlCBop4I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe study does not share the original data. If there are any special needs, the datasets used and analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author or the first author's request.