Mahima Ashok1, Dorothy Hung, Lucia Rojas-Smith, Michael T Halpern, Michael Harrison. 1. Public Health Research Division, RTI International, Washington, District of Columbia (Drs Ashok, Rojas-Smith, and Halpern); Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute (PAMFRI), Palo Alto, California (Dr Hung); Health Services Administration and Policy, Temple University College of Public Health, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Dr Halpern); and Center for Delivery, Organization, and Markets, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland (Dr Harrison).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complex system interventions benefit from close attention to factors affecting implementation and resultant outcomes. This article describes a framework for examining these factors in process redesign (PR) and for assessing PR outcomes. METHODS: Using literature scans and expert comment on draft frameworks based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a team of researchers developed the PR framework for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. As a case study, an independent team of researchers in a large care system subsequently applied the PR framework to implementation of Lean-based primary care redesigns. RESULTS: The PR framework adds 2 domains to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, focused on relevant measures of implementation and outcomes, as well as some new constructs to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Using the PR framework to guide a study of primary care PR, researchers found that the health care reform environment encouraged staff recognition of need for redesign, but physicians worried about key redesign issues, including colocation with care team partners and the competencies of the individuals assigned to manage new workflows. Team member acceptance of the redesign was also influenced by other features of the implementation process and contextual features, including the decision style of the local clinic. CONCLUSIONS: The PR framework helped guide the qualitative study and aided researchers in informing their leadership about critical issues affecting PR implementation.
BACKGROUND: Complex system interventions benefit from close attention to factors affecting implementation and resultant outcomes. This article describes a framework for examining these factors in process redesign (PR) and for assessing PR outcomes. METHODS: Using literature scans and expert comment on draft frameworks based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a team of researchers developed the PR framework for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. As a case study, an independent team of researchers in a large care system subsequently applied the PR framework to implementation of Lean-based primary care redesigns. RESULTS: The PR framework adds 2 domains to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, focused on relevant measures of implementation and outcomes, as well as some new constructs to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Using the PR framework to guide a study of primary care PR, researchers found that the health care reform environment encouraged staff recognition of need for redesign, but physicians worried about key redesign issues, including colocation with care team partners and the competencies of the individuals assigned to manage new workflows. Team member acceptance of the redesign was also influenced by other features of the implementation process and contextual features, including the decision style of the local clinic. CONCLUSIONS: The PR framework helped guide the qualitative study and aided researchers in informing their leadership about critical issues affecting PR implementation.