METHODS: The development of the insulin PDA implementation intervention was divided into two phases, incorporating step 3 and 4 of the Action Cycle in the Knowledge to Action framework. In Phase 1, barriers to the insulin PDA implementation was explored through qualitative interviews using an interview guide developed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework. In Phase 2, prioritisation of the barriers was conducted using the multivoting technique. Next, potential strategies that can address the barriers were identified based on understanding the clinic context, and evidence from literature. Then, the selected strategies were operationalised by providing full descriptions in terms of its actor, action, action target, temporality, dose, implementation outcome affected, before they were embedded into the patient care pathway in the clinic. The implementation intervention was finalised through a clinic stakeholders meeting.
RESULTS: In Phase 1, a total of 15 focus group discussions and 37 in-depth individual interviews were conducted with: healthcare policymakers (n = 11), doctors (n = 22), diabetes educators (n = 8), staff nurses (n = 6), pharmacists (n = 6), and patients (n = 31). A total of 26 barriers and 11 facilitators emerged and they were categorised into HCP, patient, organisational, and innovation factors. The multivoting exercise resulted in the prioritisation of 13 barriers, and subsequently, a total of 11 strategies were identified to address those barriers. The strategies were mandate change, training workshop, involve patients' family members or caretakers, framing/reframing, inform healthcare providers on the advantages of the insulin PDA use, define roles and responsibilities, place the insulin PDA in the consultation room, provide feedback, systematic documentation, to engage patients in treatment discussions, and juxtapose PDA in preferred language with patient's PDA in their preferred language to help with translation.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights main barriers to PDA implementation, and strategies that can be adopted for implementation. The steps for intervention development in this study can be compared with other intervention development methods to advance the field of implementation of evidence-based innovations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted through cloud-data-based digital questionnaires completed by randomly selected residents in the Johor River Basin (n=647). Data was analysed with descriptive statistics using SPSS 27 (IBM®) Software. Comparisons between indigenous and non-indigenous communities were performed using Chi square analysis.
RESULTS: Respondents in this study consisted of indigenous people (n=79) and non-indigenous people (n=568). Indigenous respondents generally perceived more frequent occurrence of extreme weather events in the next 20 years, even for the phenomena unfamiliar in Malaysian settings. All respondents showed similar concerns for health impacts of global warming, although the non-indigenous respondents perceived the risk further into the future (25 years) compared to the indigenous respondents who perceived current or imminent (<10 years) risks. Intense concerns for self, children, family members and community were shown by nearly all indigenous respondents (97-99%), while the non-indigenous people in this study expressed stronger concerns at country level and for future generations. During the last haze episode, most indigenous respondents (85%) did not notice any change in air quality nor discomfort among family members, in contrast 70% of the nonindigenous respondents claimed to have suffered from breathing problems themselves as well as others in the family. All respondents were concerned about air quality in their surroundings, indigenous people were concerned for the near future (<10 years), and non-indigenous people were concerned for the next 25 years.
CONCLUSION: In this study, respondents were generally concerned about the health impacts of unimpeded global warming. There was significant difference in perceptions between indigenous and non-indigenous respondents. The findings were useful, complemented with further studies, to improve understanding of public awareness and to help develop relevant education programmes accessible for wider audience.