Scholarlink

Background <p>While employing change agents is a widely used strategy to support implementation of evidence-based practices in healthcare, the perspectives of the target users of this intervention are under-explored. Within a genomic care setting in Australia, we examined non-genetic clinicians’ views of and experience with embedded genetic counsellors employed as external change agents to support the adoption of genomics in clinical care.</p> Methods <p>We conducted qualitative interviews with 16 non-genetic healthcare professionals involved in different models of genomic care, all of which employed genetic counsellors as external change agents to provide embedded genetic expertise and support in non-genetic specialty clinics. The Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) theory and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were drawn upon to guide the study design and data analysis to explore the enablers/barriers to non-genetic clinicians’ use of genetic expertise and the wider implementation context of the change agent approach.</p> Results <p>The TDF domain ‘Belief about Consequences’ was a positive influence on non-genetic specialists’ view of the embedded change agents, when they believed that the change agents positively impacted patient outcomes and the clinicians’ knowledge and practice of using genomics in routine care. Meanwhile, major barriers were related to ‘Environmental Context &amp; Resources,’ e.g. time constraints and logistic hurdles of involving change agents. Perceived attributes related to ‘complexity’ and ‘observability’ of genetic expertise were critical factors influencing the decision to put the support to actual use, impacting the diffusion of the genomic innovation.</p> Conclusions <p>Our study offers insights into behavioural influences and contextual conditions shaping clinicians’ decisions to interact with genetic counsellor change agents and incorporate (or not) their expertise into their routine care. Such understandings can inform future design and implementation of interventions that use change agents to support the adoption of innovations, such as genomics, effectively and sustainably.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

What influenced the use of embedded genetic expertise by non-genetic clinicians: a qualitative study using the diffusion of innovations theory and theoretical domains framework

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月22日

查看全文
  • Trang Thu Do,
  • Belinda Dawson McClaren,
  • Clara Gaff,
  • Melissa Martyn

摘要

Background

While employing change agents is a widely used strategy to support implementation of evidence-based practices in healthcare, the perspectives of the target users of this intervention are under-explored. Within a genomic care setting in Australia, we examined non-genetic clinicians’ views of and experience with embedded genetic counsellors employed as external change agents to support the adoption of genomics in clinical care.

Methods

We conducted qualitative interviews with 16 non-genetic healthcare professionals involved in different models of genomic care, all of which employed genetic counsellors as external change agents to provide embedded genetic expertise and support in non-genetic specialty clinics. The Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) theory and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were drawn upon to guide the study design and data analysis to explore the enablers/barriers to non-genetic clinicians’ use of genetic expertise and the wider implementation context of the change agent approach.

Results

The TDF domain ‘Belief about Consequences’ was a positive influence on non-genetic specialists’ view of the embedded change agents, when they believed that the change agents positively impacted patient outcomes and the clinicians’ knowledge and practice of using genomics in routine care. Meanwhile, major barriers were related to ‘Environmental Context & Resources,’ e.g. time constraints and logistic hurdles of involving change agents. Perceived attributes related to ‘complexity’ and ‘observability’ of genetic expertise were critical factors influencing the decision to put the support to actual use, impacting the diffusion of the genomic innovation.

Conclusions

Our study offers insights into behavioural influences and contextual conditions shaping clinicians’ decisions to interact with genetic counsellor change agents and incorporate (or not) their expertise into their routine care. Such understandings can inform future design and implementation of interventions that use change agents to support the adoption of innovations, such as genomics, effectively and sustainably.