Introduction: Uganda has a high demand for neurosurgical and neurological care. 78% of the over 50 million population reside in rural and remote communities where access to neurosurgical and neurological services is lacking. This study aimed to determine the feasibility appropriateness and usability of mobile neuro clinics (MNCs) in providing neurological care to rural and remote Ugandan populations.
Methods: Neurosurgery neurology and mobile health clinic providers participated in an education and interview session to assess the feasibility appropriateness and usability of the MNC intervention. A qualitative analysis of the interview responses using the constructs in the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was performed. Providers' opinions were weighted using average sentiment scores on a novel sentiment-weighted scale adapted from the CFIR. A stakeholder analysis was also performed to assess the power and interest of the actors described by the participants.
Results: Twenty-one healthcare providers completed the study. Participants discussed the potential benefits and concerns of MNCs as well as potential barriers and critical incidents that could jeopardize the intervention. Of the five CFIR domains evaluated variables in the implementation process domain showed the highest average sentiment scores followed by the implementation climate constructs inner setting innovation and outer setting domains. Furthermore many interested stakeholders were identified with diverse roles and responsibilities for implementing MNCs. These findings demonstrate that MNC innovation is feasible appropriate and usable.
Conclusion: The findings of this study support the feasibility appropriateness and usability of MNCs in Uganda. However integration of this innovation requires careful planning and stakeholder engagement at all levels to ensure the best possible outcomes.
Methods: Neurosurgery neurology and mobile health clinic providers participated in an education and interview session to assess the feasibility appropriateness and usability of the MNC intervention. A qualitative analysis of the interview responses using the constructs in the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was performed. Providers' opinions were weighted using average sentiment scores on a novel sentiment-weighted scale adapted from the CFIR. A stakeholder analysis was also performed to assess the power and interest of the actors described by the participants.
Results: Twenty-one healthcare providers completed the study. Participants discussed the potential benefits and concerns of MNCs as well as potential barriers and critical incidents that could jeopardize the intervention. Of the five CFIR domains evaluated variables in the implementation process domain showed the highest average sentiment scores followed by the implementation climate constructs inner setting innovation and outer setting domains. Furthermore many interested stakeholders were identified with diverse roles and responsibilities for implementing MNCs. These findings demonstrate that MNC innovation is feasible appropriate and usable.
Conclusion: The findings of this study support the feasibility appropriateness and usability of MNCs in Uganda. However integration of this innovation requires careful planning and stakeholder engagement at all levels to ensure the best possible outcomes.