Keywords: needs assessment, implementation, family physicians, questionnaire development, content validity, face validity, primary care, evidence-based methods

Background:

Empowerment of evidence-based innovations in healthcare often fails due to poor adaptation to routine settings. Existing tools rarely assess specific needs of providers for adopting particular interventions. A standardized instrument to identify and prioritize such needs could support more effective implementation.

Research questions:

How can a standardized questionnaire be developed and validated to assess family physicians’ specific needs for implementing evidence-based methods and recommendations in routine practice?

Method:

A Needs Assessment Questionnaire was developed using selected determinants from the Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ). Items were reformulated to reflect explicit implementation-related needs of healthcare professionals. Content validity was assessed in two rounds by 12 and 10 experts. Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI) were calculated. Face validity was assessed via a survey of 25 family physicians; Item Impact Scores (IIS) were calculated based on their importance ratings. Qualitative feedback guided item refinement. Only items that met all three validity thresholds were retained.

Results:

An initial pool of 31 items (12 closed and 19 open-ended) was developed. Based on assessment by both experts and family physicians, 14 items met thresholds for CVR (≥0.62), CVI (≥0.79), and IIS (≥1.5), reflecting essentiality, relevance, clarity, and importance. These items represent key needs related to clear instructions, practical skills, time, financial motivation, support from organizational leadership, availability of resources, and other additional needs. The final version is structured for clarity and feasibility. One piloting option will explore needs for implementing evidence-based screening tools, such as depression screening and the “CheckMe” web-based tool that generates personalized screening plans.

Conclusions:

The developed questionnaire is content- and face-validated for use with family physicians. It supports structured identification of implementation-related needs and may enhance tailored adoption of evidence-based practices.

Points for discussion:

1. How can the questionnaire be used among nurses, physiotherapists, and other medical specialists?

2. Is the tool suitable for adaptation across healthcare systems and languages?

3. For which clinical methods and recommendations might this questionnaire be especially useful?