Major influencing factors on routine implementation of shared decision-making in cancer care: qualitative process evaluation of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

Abstract

Abstract Background Shared decision-making (SDM) is highly relevant in oncology but rarely implemented in routine care. In a stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation trial, the outcome evaluation of a theoretically and empirically based multi-component SDM implementation program did not show a statistically significant effect on patient-reported SDM uptake. Within this SDM implementation trial, a thorough a priori planned process evaluation was conducted. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing SDM implementation in the context of a multi-component SDM implementation program. Methods We conducted qualitative process evaluation of a stepped-wedge SDM implementation trial. Qualitative data included interviews with nurses and physicians of participating departments, field notes by the study team, and meeting minutes. Data were analyzed via deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis on basis of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results Transcripts of 107 interviews with 126 nurses and physicians, 304 pages of field note documentation, and 125 pages of meeting minutes were analyzed. Major factors influencing SDM implementation were found for all domains of the CFIR: a) four regarding characteristics of the individuals involved (e.g., perceived personal relevance, individual motivation to change), b) eleven regarding the inner setting (e.g., leadership engagement, networks and communication, available resources, compatibility with clinical practice), c) two regarding the outer setting (e.g., culture of health care delivery), d) eight regarding characteristics of the intervention (e.g., relative advantage, adaptability), and e) three regarding the implementation process (e.g., integration into existing structures). Furthermore, we found strong interrelations between several of the influencing factors within and between domains. Conclusions This comprehensive process evaluation complements the outcome evaluation of the SDM implementation trial and adds to its interpretation. The identified influencing factors can be used for planning, conducting, and evaluating SDM implementation in the future. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03393351, registered 8 January 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03393351

Keywords

• Shared decision-making
• Implementation science
• Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
• Process evaluation
• Qualitative methods
• Oncology