京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・論文博士 / 博士(医学) / 乙第13363号 / 論医博第2205号 / 新制||医||1045(附属図書館) / (主査)教授 妹尾 浩, 教授 今中 雄一, 教授 川上 浩司 / 学位規則第4条第2項該当 / Doctor of Medical Science / Kyoto University / DFAM

Purpose. The purpose of this dissertation is to understand the state of recommended practice for sedation interruptions (SI) and to discover factors that hinder or facilitate critical care nurses’ use in practice. To garner insight about why this evidence-informed intervention is not being used as recommended to improve mechanically ventilated patient outcomes. Methods. A series of studies using a multi-methods design and guided by the Knowledge to Action Framework: study 1) a systematic review and critical appraisal examined the quality and reporting of all available guidelines and care bundles with recommendations related to SI for mechanically ventilated adults in critical care; study 2) a needs assessment included an environmental scan of the study site and gap-analysis using a retrospective chart audit to measure the nature and magnitude of the evidence-practice gap; study 3) a descriptive qualitative study used semi-structured theory-based interviews to deepen our understanding of the determinants that influence SI use in preparation for a future implementation study. Findings. Study 1 included 11 guidelines and care bundles with 15 recommendations about SI. Deficiencies in the methodological quality of the current guidelines and care bundles may impact overall credibility and applicability of the recommendations, though SI is currently recommended best-practice. Study 2 confirmed the existence of an evidence-practice gap related to SI and affirmed the need to discover barriers and drivers to best practice implementation (study 3). We identified nine facilitators and 20 barriers to SI use by nurses. Facilitators were associated with the innovation (e.g., the importance of protocols) and the potential adopters (e.g., SI are specific to the nurse's role). The barriers were associated with the potential adopters (e.g., nurses’ knowledge gaps and variable goals of SI) and the practice environment (e.g., lack of availability of extra staff and multidisciplinary rounds). Conclusion. Before adequately implementing SI and evaluating uptake by nurses, we need to address modifications to existing guidelines and recommendations, even though SI is considered best practice. A theory-informed implementation study can further activate the use of SI for mechanically ventilated adults in critical care.

Les troubles douloureux de l’épaule (TDE) affectent jusqu’à 55% de la population générale et sont souvent difficiles à traiter. L’objectif de cette thèse était de développer une intervention de mobilisation des connaissances permettant d’implanter les recommandations de guides de pratique clinique (GPC) couvrant la prise en charge des TDE. Pour ce faire, un processus basé sur le cadre conceptuel Knowledge-to-Action a été utilisé. D’abord, une revue systématique des recommandations des GPC à implanter pour améliorer la prise en charge des TDE a été effectuée. Puis, les écarts dans la pratique des cliniciens ont été identifiés à l’aide d’un sondage documentant la prise en charge des TDE ainsi qu’une étude évaluant la concordance entre les physiothérapeutes et les orthopédistes au niveau du diagnostic et de la prise en charge des TDE. Ensuite, les déterminants à l’implantation des recommandations des GPC ont été identifiés en procédant à deux études qualitatives ciblant les expériences et les attentes des patients vivant avec un TDE, puis les barrières et facilitateurs à l’implantation des recommandations des GPC identifiés par les cliniciens. Enfin, l’utilisation du Behaviour Change Wheel et des déterminants ont permis d’identifier des stratégies visant à implanter les recommandations de GPC sur la prise en charge des TDE en première ligne de soins. La revue systématique des GPC a permis de déterminer qu’initialement, les TDE ne requièrent généralement pas d’imagerie médicale et de référence à un médecin spécialiste, mais qu’un programme de réadaptation actif est requis. Selon les résultats du sondage, les médecins de famille (n=76) ont recommandé plus d’imagerie que les physiothérapeutes (n=175). Jusqu’à deux physiothérapeutes sur trois ont sélectionné des traitements non recommandés par les GPC. Les résultats de l’étude de concordance démontrent que l’accord entre physiothérapeutes et orthopédistes était bon au niveau du diagnostic et modéré au niveau du triage des candidats chirurgicaux. Les patients souffrant de TDE interrogés (n=13) ont mentionné, dans la première étude qualitative, avoir attendu que leur douleur soit incapacitante avant de consulter un professionnel. Ces participants s’attendaient alors à recevoir un diagnostic clair et à être référés pour des tests d’imagerie. Finalement, ils espéraient recevoir des explications complètes et se voir proposer des options pertinentes de traitements. Les 19 physiothérapeutes et 16 médecins de famille interrogés dans la deuxième étude qualitative ont indiqué comme barrières à l’utilisation des recommandations des GPC : le manque de connaissances, le manque d’habileté à réaliser une évaluation clinique de l’épaule et la crainte de ne pas détecter une pathologie grave, si présente, sans un test d’imagerie. Le temps insuffisant de consultation avec les patients, leurs attentes et le manque d’accès à certains soins ont aussi été indiqués comme des barrières. Les principales stratégies identifiées suivant ces études incluent donc des interventions éducatives, la préparation de champions cliniques et la création d’équipes cliniques interdisciplinaires. À l’aide de ces stratégies, l’implantation pilote de l’intervention sera réalisée dans des groupes de médecine familiale. L’impact potentiellement bénéfique de cette implantation pourrait, à terme, améliorer la prise en charge des patients atteints de TDE. / Shoulder pain is a common and difficult to manage condition that can affect up to 55% of the general population. To optimize shoulder pain management in primary care, the main objective of this thesis was to develop a knowledge mobilization intervention to implement the recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) covering the management of different shoulder disorders. A knowledge mobilization process based on four steps of the Knowledge-to-Action framework was used in this thesis. First, a systematic review of CPGs was performed to identify recommendations to be implemented for improving shoulder pain management in primary care. Then, the evidence-practice gaps were assessed using a survey documenting family physicians and physiotherapists shoulder pain management as well as in a study evaluating the concordance between physiotherapists and orthopedists for shoulder pain diagnosis and management. The determinants influencing CPGs recommendations’ implementation were identified by conducting two qualitative studies. The first study explored the experiences and expectations of patients living with shoulder pain and the second aimed to interview clinicians for identifying barriers and facilitators to the implementation of CPGs recommendations. Finally, based on the identified determinants and using the Behaviour Change Wheel method, we identified strategies for implementing CPGs recommendations covering the management of shoulder pain in primary care. Based on the systematic review of shoulder CPGs, we identified that shoulder pain generally does not initially require diagnostic imaging and referral to a medical musculoskeletal specialist, but that an active rehabilitation program is required. According to the survey results, family physicians (n=76) recommended more imaging than physiotherapists (n=175) for rotator cuff tendinopathy and adhesive capsulitis, although this is not indicated. Up to two out of three physiotherapists selected treatments not recommended by CPGs in the management of shoulder pain. The results of the concordance study showed that the agreement between physiotherapists and orthopedists was good in terms of diagnosis and moderate in terms of triage of surgical candidates. Patients (n=13) interviewed in the first qualitative study reported waiting until their shoulder pain was disabling before seeing a family physician or a physiotherapist. Participants expected a clear diagnosis and imaging tests to explain their shoulder pain. They also wished to receive clear and thorough explanations and relevant treatment options. The 19 physiotherapists and 16 family physicians that participated in focus groups indicated as barriers to the use of CPGs recommendations: lack of knowledge, poor skills in performing a clinical evaluation and fear of not identifying a serious pathology without medical imaging. Patients’ expectations, insufficient consultation time with patients and lack of patients’ access to certain care, such as rehabilitation treatments were also identified as barriers. The main strategies identified following these studies therefore include educational interventions, the preparation of clinical champions and the creation of interdisciplinary clinical teams. Using these strategies, pilot implementation of the intervention will be carried out in family medicine groups. The potentially beneficial impact of this implantation could ultimately improve the management of patients with shoulder pain in primary care.