Implementing a Systematic Voiding Program for Patients With Urinary Incontinence After Stroke

Bibliographic Data

ID4672009
AuthorsBeverley French (University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom), Lois H Thomas (0000-0001-5218-6546, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom), Joanna Harrison (0000-0001-8963-7240, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom), Christopher R Burton (0000-0003-1159-1494, Bangor University, Bangor, United Kingdom), Denise Forshaw (0000-0001-5725-3736, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom), Joanne Booth (Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, United Kingdom), Jo Booth (0000-0002-7870-6391, Glasgow Caledonian University), David Britt (0000-0002-6940-317X, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom), Francine M Cheater (University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom), Francine Cheater (0000-0001-7392-4624, University of East Anglia), Brenda Roe (0000-0002-2625-9315, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, United Kingdom), Caroline L Watkins (University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom), Caroline Watkins (0000-0002-9403-3772, University of Lancashire)
Year2016
Volume26
Issue10
Pages1393-1408
Publication date2016-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueQualitative Health Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1049-7323 • E-ISSN: 1552-7557
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1049732316630975
PMID26935722
OpenAlexW2291322571
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited49

We explored health professionals' views of implementing a systematic voiding program (SVP) in a multi-site qualitative process evaluation in stroke services recruited to the intervention arms of a cluster randomized controlled feasibility trial during 2011-2013. We conducted semi-structured group or individual interviews with 38 purposively selected nursing, managerial, and care staff involved in delivering the SVP. Content analysis of transcripts used normalization process theory (NPT) as a pre-specified organization-level exploratory framework. Barriers to implementing the SVP included perceived lack of suitability for some patient groups, patient fear of extending hospital stay, and difficulties with SVP enactment, scheduling, timing, recording, and monitoring. Enablers included the guidance provided by the SVP, patient and relative involvement, extra staff, improved nursing skill and confidence, and experience of success. Three potential mechanisms of consistency, visibility, and individualization linked the SVP process with improvements in outcome, and should be emphasized in SVP implementation

Randomized controlled trial · Urinary incontinence · Clinical practice guidelines implementation · Health Policy Implementation Science · Medicine · Nursing · Pelvic floor disorders treatments · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub