Table 4 Interview participants’ perception of implementation tools
From: How do clinicians use implementation tools to apply breast cancer screening guidelines to practice?
Implementation tool | Participants’ perception |
|---|---|
TOOLS to be used by CLINICIANS | |
Screening recommendations for breast cancer with mammography -Â in PBSG module | Majority found tool very informative Some felt they could internalize information, therefore not requiring continued access to tool |
Screening recommendations for clinical breast exams and breast self-exams - in PBSG module | General consensus that tool simple and straightforward. Some found tool simple enough for use in educating medical students and residents Primary barrier—disagreed with CBE recommendations |
Discussion video: CTFPHC breast cancer video - on CTFPHC website | Only one user for this tool Many had difficulty accessing, opening or downloading the tool Others preferred reading information to watching a video |
TOOLS to be used with or by patients | |
Patient handout: breast cancer screening—what is the right choice for me?—in PBSG module | Tool useful for facilitating discussions with patients, especially the provision of a visual estimation of risk Primary barrier for implementation—availability of tool and time constraints for discussing the tool |
Patient handout: patient algorithm—hyperlink to CTFPHC website | Total consensus on value of algorithms, information is concise and clear Could easily be internalized No noted barriers |
Patient handout: benefits and risks poster—hyperlink to CTFPHC website | Tool viewed as a valuable teaching tool for patients Good information with supporting statistics Several participants felt that concepts may be beyond the comprehension level of the average layperson |
Patient handout: FAQs for patients -Â hyperlink to CTFPHC website | A valuable tool. Good information sheet to hand out to patients that have questions. Tool aesthetically pleasing and therefore an incentive for patient to read. Limited awareness and restricted accessibility were barriers to implementation. Two pages may be too lengthy for patients (tool developers consider reducing to one page for all age groups?) |