Literature DB >> 25410767

The challenge of transferring an implementation strategy from academia to the field: a process evaluation of local quality improvement collaboratives in Dutch primary care using the normalization process theory.

Jasper Trietsch1, Ben van Steenkiste, Sjoerd Hobma, Arnoud Frericks, Richard Grol, Job Metsemakers, Trudy van der Weijden.   

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND
OBJECTIVES: A quality improvement strategy consisting of comparative feedback and peer review embedded in available local quality improvement collaboratives proved to be effective in changing the test-ordering behaviour of general practitioners. However, implementing this strategy was problematic. We aimed for large-scale implementation of an adapted strategy covering both test ordering and prescribing performance. Because we failed to achieve large-scale implementation, the aim of this study was to describe and analyse the challenges of the transferring process.
METHODS: In a qualitative study 19 regional health officers, pharmacists, laboratory specialists and general practitioners were interviewed within 6 months after the transfer period. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and independently coded by two of the authors. The codes were matched to the dimensions of the normalization process theory.
RESULTS: The general idea of the strategy was widely supported, but generating the feedback was more complex than expected and the need for external support after transfer of the strategy remained high because participants did not assume responsibility for the work and the distribution of resources that came with it.
CONCLUSION: Evidence on effectiveness, a national infrastructure for these collaboratives and a general positive attitude were not sufficient for normalization. Thinking about managing large databases, responsibility for tasks and distribution of resources should start as early as possible when planning complex quality improvement strategies. Merely exploring the barriers and facilitators experienced in a preceding trial is not sufficient. Although multifaceted implementation strategies to change professional behaviour are attractive, their inherent complexity is also a pitfall for large-scale implementation.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical audit; clinical guidelines; evaluation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25410767     DOI: 10.1111/jep.12287

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  6 in total

1.  Pain Management Program in Cardiology: A Template for Application of Normalization Process Theory and Social Marketing to Implement a Change in Practice Quality Improvement.

Authors:  Kerstin Bode; Peter Whittaker; Miriam Dressler; Yvonne Bauer; Haider Ali
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation.

Authors:  Marjolein Lugtenberg; Dennis Pasveer; Trudy van der Weijden; Gert P Westert; Rudolf B Kool
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 2.497

3.  Effect of audit and feedback with peer review on general practitioners' prescribing and test ordering performance: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  J Trietsch; B van Steenkiste; R Grol; B Winkens; H Ulenkate; J Metsemakers; T van der Weijden
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 2.497

4.  Using Normalization Process Theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Carl R May; Amanda Cummings; Melissa Girling; Mike Bracher; Frances S Mair; Christine M May; Elizabeth Murray; Michelle Myall; Tim Rapley; Tracy Finch
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 7.327

5.  Translational framework for implementation evaluation and research: a normalisation process theory coding manual for qualitative research and instrument development.

Authors:  Carl R May; Bianca Albers; Mike Bracher; Tracy L Finch; Anthony Gilbert; Melissa Girling; Kathryn Greenwood; Anne MacFarlane; Frances S Mair; Christine M May; Elizabeth Murray; Sebastian Potthoff; Tim Rapley
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2022-02-22       Impact factor: 7.327

Review 6.  Making change last? Exploring the value of sustainability approaches in healthcare: a scoping review.

Authors:  L Lennox; A Linwood-Amor; L Maher; J Reed
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2020-10-13
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.