The contribution of qualitative research to the development of tailor-made community-based interventions in primary care: a review.

BACKGROUND In recent years, a trend in the use of tailor-made approaches and pragmatic trial methodology for evaluating effectiveness has been visible in programs ranging from large-scale national health prevention campaigns to community-based initiatives. Qualitative research is used more often for tailoring interventions towards communities and/or local care practices. This article systematically reviews the contribution of qualitative research in developing tailor-made community-based interventions in primary care evaluated by means of the pragmatic trial methodology. METHODS A systematic search of Pubmed/Medline and Embase revealed 33 articles. Using a literature mapping process, the articles were arranged according to the development phases identified in the MRC framework for the development of complex interventions to improve health. RESULTS The review showed qualitative research is mainly used to provide insight into the contextual circumstances of the interventions' implementation, delivery and evaluation. To a lesser extent, qualitative research findings are used for tailoring and improving the design of the interventions for a better fit with daily primary care practice. Moreover, most qualitative findings are used for tailoring the interventions' contextual circumstances so that the interventions are performed in practice as planned, rather than adjusted to local circumstances. CONCLUSIONS Pragmatic trials seem to be oxymoronic. Although the pragmatic trial methodology establishes the effectiveness of interventions under natural, non-experimental conditions, no pragmatic fit is allowed. Qualitative research's contribution to the development of tailor-made community-based interventions lies in providing ongoing evaluations of the dilemmas faced in pragmatic trials and allowing for the development of true tailor-made interventions.

[1]  Margaret E Cupples,et al.  The contribution of qualitative research in designing a complex intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in two different healthcare systems , 2006, BMC Health Services Research.

[2]  R. Bal,et al.  Coping with methodological dilemmas; about establishing the effectiveness of interventions in routine medical practice , 2006, BMC Health Services Research.

[3]  O. Pacheun,et al.  Participatory supervision model: building health promotion capacity among health officers and the community. , 2006, Rural and remote health.

[4]  Teun Zuiderent,et al.  Blurring the Center: On the politics of ethnography , 2002, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Margo S. Rowan,et al.  Family physicians' reactions to performance assessment feedback. , 2006, Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien.

[6]  D. Kendrick,et al.  Understanding of blood pressure by people with type 2 diabetes: a primary care focus group study. , 2005, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[7]  C. Brotons,et al.  Prevention and health promotion in clinical practice: the views of general practitioners in Europe. , 2005, Preventive medicine.

[8]  J. Unützer,et al.  Project IMPACT: A Report on Barriers and Facilitators to Sustainability , 2006, Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research.

[9]  M. White,et al.  The acceptability and impact of a randomised controlled trial of welfare rights advice accessed via primary health care: qualitative study , 2006, BMC public health.

[10]  M. Abramson,et al.  Caregivers' use of, and attitudes towards, written asthma action plans in North-West Melbourne. , 2005, Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group.

[11]  L. Yardley,et al.  Implementation of nurse-delivered vestibular rehabilitation in primary care: a qualitative study of nurses' views on involvement in an innovative service. , 2007, Journal of clinical nursing.

[12]  M. Hotopf The pragmatic randomised controlled trial , 2002 .

[13]  C. Chew‐Graham,et al.  'Justifiable depression': how primary care professionals and patients view late-life depression? A qualitative study. , 2006, Family practice.

[14]  R. Thomson,et al.  Patients or research subjects? A qualitative study of participation in a randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[15]  J. Aitken,et al.  The view from two sides: a qualitative study of community and medical perspectives on screening for colorectal cancer using FOBT. , 2004, Preventive medicine.

[16]  Andrew Robinson,et al.  Uncovering the Limits of Patient-Centeredness: Implementing a Self-Management Trial for Chronic Illness , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[17]  Kurt C Stange,et al.  Sustainability of a practice-individualized preventive service delivery intervention. , 2003, American journal of preventive medicine.

[18]  Christina M Getrich,et al.  An ethnography of clinic "noise" in a community-based, promotora-centered mental health intervention. , 2007, Social science & medicine.

[19]  J André Knottnerus,et al.  Pragmatic trials in primary care. Methodological challenges and solutions demonstrated by the DIAMOND-study , 2007, BMC medical research methodology.

[20]  A FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF RCTs FOR COMPLEX INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE HEALTH , 2000 .

[21]  A. Back,et al.  How primary care providers talk to patients about alcohol a qualitative study , 2006, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[22]  A. Staines,et al.  A qualitative investigation of the views and health beliefs of patients with Type 2 diabetes following the introduction of a diabetes shared care service , 2003, Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association.

[23]  S. Flottorp,et al.  Identifying barriers and tailoring interventions to improve the management of urinary tract infections and sore throat: a pragmatic study using qualitative methods , 2003, BMC health services research.

[24]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Complex interventions: how “out of control” can a randomised controlled trial be? , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  I. Russell,et al.  General practitioners' uptake of clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative study , 2003, Journal of health services research & policy.

[26]  Richard Birtwhistle,et al.  Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. , 2003, BMC medical research methodology.

[27]  S. Willis,et al.  Referrals and relationships: in-practice referrals meetings in a general practice. , 2001, Family practice.

[28]  F. Légaré,et al.  Supporting patients facing difficult health care decisions: use of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. , 2006, Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien.

[29]  M. Ruffin,et al.  Interventions fail to increase cancer screening rates in community-based primary care practices. , 2004, Preventive medicine.

[30]  Maren K Olsen,et al.  Nurse administered telephone intervention for blood pressure control: a patient-tailored multifactorial intervention. , 2005, Patient education and counseling.

[31]  Aviv Shachak,et al.  The Impact of an Evidence-Based Medicine Educational Intervention on Primary Care Physicians: A Qualitative Study , 2007, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[32]  J. Dale,et al.  A psychological approach to providing self-management education for people with type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes Manual , 2006, BMC family practice.

[33]  Martin White,et al.  Using quantitative and qualitative data in health services research – what happens when mixed method findings conflict? [ISRCTN61522618] , 2006, BMC Health Services Research.

[34]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Practice based, longitudinal, qualitative interview study of computerised evidence based guidelines in primary care , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[35]  K. Malterud,et al.  Long-term impact of elevated cardiovascular risk detected by screening , 2005, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[36]  Sally Kerry,et al.  A lesson learnt: the importance of modelling in randomized controlled trials for complex interventions in primary care. , 2004, Family practice.

[37]  T. Peters,et al.  Decision analysis for newly diagnosed hypertensive patients: a qualitative investigation. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.

[38]  K. Perreault,et al.  Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 2011 .

[39]  N. Pimlott,et al.  Women's views on chemoprevention of breast cancer: qualitative study. , 2006, Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien.

[40]  Jenenne Geske,et al.  Improving female preventive health care delivery through practice change: an Every Woman Matters study. , 2005, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[41]  P. Bower,et al.  Peoples' understandings of a primary care-based mental health self-help clinic. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.