Exploring practice and perspectives on shared decision-making about osteoporosis medicines in Fracture Liaison Services: the iFraP development qualitative study

Bullock, Laurna; Manning, Fay; Hawarden, Ashley; Fleming, Jane; Leyland, Sarah; Clark, Emma M.; Thomas, Simon; Gidlow, Christopher; Iglesias-Urrutia, Cynthia P.; Protheroe, Joanne; Lefroy, Janet; Ryan, Sarah; O’Neill, Terence W.; Mallen, Christian; Jinks, Clare; Paskins, Zoe

Abstract

Summary
Interviews and focus groups with patients, FLS clinicians, and GPs identified challenges relating to clinical and shared decision-making about bone health and osteoporosis medicines. Findings will inform the development of the multicomponent iFraP intervention to address identified training needs and barriers to implementation to facilitate SDM about osteoporosis medicines.

Purpose
The iFraP (improving uptake of Fracture Prevention treatments) study aimed to develop a multicomponent intervention, including an osteoporosis decision support tool (DST), to support shared decision-making (SDM) about osteoporosis medicines. To inform iFraP intervention development, this qualitative study explored current practice in relation to communication about bone health and osteoporosis medicines, anticipated barriers to, and facilitators of, an osteoporosis DST, and perceived training needs.

Methods
Patients attending an FLS consultation (n = 8), FLS clinicians (n = 9), and general practitioners (GPs; n = 7) were purposively sampled to participate in a focus group and/or telephone interview. Data were transcribed, inductively coded, and then mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) as a deductive framework to systematically identify possible barriers to, and facilitators of, implementing a DST.

Results
Inductive codes were deductively mapped to 12 TDF domains. FLS clinicians were perceived to have specialist expertise (knowledge). However, clinicians described aspects of clinical decision-making and risk communication as difficult (cognitive skills). Patients reflected on decisional uncertainty about medicines (decision processes). Discussions about current practice and the proposed DST indicated opportunities to facilitate SDM, if identified training needs are met. Potential individual and system-level barriers to implementation were identified, such as differences in FLS configuration and a move to remote consulting (environmental context and resources).

Conclusions
Understanding of current practice revealed unmet training needs, indicating that using a DST in isolation would be unlikely to produce a sustained shift to SDM. Findings will shape iFraP intervention development to address unmet needs.

Citation

Bullock, L., Manning, F., Hawarden, A., Fleming, J., Leyland, S., Clark, E. M., …Paskins, Z. (in press). Exploring practice and perspectives on shared decision-making about osteoporosis medicines in Fracture Liaison Services: the iFraP development qualitative study. Archives of Osteoporosis, 19(1), Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-024-01410-6

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: May 29, 2024
• Online Publication Date: Jun 19, 2024
• Deposit Date: Jun 24, 2024
• Publicly Available Date: Jun 24, 2024
• Journal: Archives of Osteoporosis
• Print ISSN: 1862-3522
• Electronic ISSN: 1862-3514
• Publisher: Springer Verlag
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 19
• Issue: 1
• Article Number: 50
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-024-01410-6
• Keywords: Intervention development, Osteoporosis, Shared decision-making, Qualitative, iFraP, Fracture Liaison Services, Consultation
• Public URL: https://keele-repository.worktribe.com/output/855699
• Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11657-024-01410-6