Bridging the gap: a qualitative process evaluation from the perspectives of healthcare professionals of an audit-and-feedback-based intervention to improve transition to adult care for young people living with type 1 diabetes

• Main Authors: Janet A. Parsons (Author), Jannah Wigle (Author), Ian Zenlea (Author), Noah Ivers (Author), Geetha Mukerji (Author), Alanna Landry (Author), Zubin Punthakee (Author), Cheril L. Clarson (Author), Rayzel Shulman (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: BMC, 2024-10-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1186/s12913-024-11734-1; 1472-6963
• Keywords: Type 1 diabetes mellitus; Adolescence; Transitions in care; Qualitative methods; Process evaluation; Quality improvement; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: BMC Health Services Research, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2024)

Abstract Background The transition from pediatric to adult care is a vulnerable time for young people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Bridging the Gap (BTG) is an audit-and-feedback (AF) intervention aimed at improving both transitions-in-care processes and diabetes management in the year following transition. As part of BTG, we conducted a qualitative process evaluation to understand: (a) what was implemented and how; and (b) the contextual factors (micro-, meso- and macro-) that affected implementation, outcomes and study processes. Methods Using qualitative descriptive methodology, interviews were conducted with 13 healthcare professionals (HCPs) delivering diabetes care to transitioning youth. Participants were asked about their experiences of BTG study processes and feedback tools, the quality improvement (QI) initiatives implemented at their site, and potential spread and scale. Interviews also explored the impacts of COVID-19 on transition care and study processes and results. Results Five key themes were identified. Participants' reflections on the BTG study design indicated they appreciated its flexible, site-specific approach to QI, which they saw as crucial to the success of their initiatives. Engagement with feedback reports and other study resources provided comparative, site-specific data. Participants described the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on patients, care provision and study implementation. Their site-specific QI initiatives resulted in changes to their transition practices. Finally, participants commented on how BTG and its processes fostered a community of practice (CoP) between sites, resulting in new opportunities to collaborate and share experiences. Conclusions BTG resulted in a CoP among practitioners delivering transition care to youth with T1D, which could be scaled up to promote a learning health system in pediatric diabetes care. Qualitative process evaluation is a useful tool for understanding how contextual factors affect the implementation and outcomes of complex QI interventions.