Perceived facilitators and barriers to implementing the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) model of care, and related spine care program by the people in Cross Lake, northern Manitoba, Canada: A qualitative study using the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF)
Authors: Robak Nicole , Broeckelmann Elena , Mior Silvano , Atkinson-Graham Melissa , Ward Jennifer , Scott Muriel , Passmore Steven , Kopansky-Giles Deborah , Tavares Patricia , Moss Jean , Ladwig Jacqueline , Glazebrook Cheryl , Monias David , Hamilton Helga , McKay Donnie , Smolinski Randall , Haldeman Scott , Bussières André 
Published: June 2024

Abstract

Background. Back pain is very common and a leading cause of disability worldwide. Due to health care system inequalities, Indigenous communities have a disproportionately higher prevalence of injury and acute and chronic diseases compared to the general Canadian population. Indigenous communities, particularly in northern Canada, have limited access to evidence-based spine care. Strategies established in collaboration with Indigenous peoples are needed to address unmet healthcare needs, including spine care (chiropractic and movement program) services. This study aimed to understand perceived facilitators and barriers likely to influence the uptake of the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) model of spine care (MoC) and related implementation strategies among Cross Lake community leaders and clinicians working at Cross Lake Nursing Station (CLNS) in northern Manitoba.
Method. A qualitative exploratory design using an interpretivist paradigm was used. Twenty community partners were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews underpinned by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) adapted to capture pertinent information. Data were analyzed deductively and inductively, and the interpretation of findings were explored in consultation with community members and partners.
Results. Community leaders (n=9) and physicians, nurses, and allied health workers (n=11) emphasized: 1) the importance of contextualizing the MoC (triaging and care pathway) and proposed new services through in-person community engagement; 2) the need and desire for local non-pharmacological spine care approaches; and 3) streamlining patient triage and CLNS workflow. Recommendations for the streamlining included reducing managerial/administrative duties, educating new incoming clinicians, incorporating follow-up appointments for spine pain patients, and establishing an electronic medical record system along with a patient portal. Suggestions regarding how to sustain the new spine care services included providing transportation, protecting allocated clinic space, resolving insurance coverage discrepancies, addressing misconceptions about chiropractic care, instilling the value of physical activity for self-care and pain relief, and a short-term (30-day) incentivised movement program which considers a variety of movement options and offers a social component after each session.
Conclusion. Community partners were favorable to the inclusion of a refined GSCI MoC. Adapting the TDF to unique Indigenous needs may help understand how best to implement the MoC in communities with similar needs.