Trial reportImplementation science : IS2011
Validity and usefulness of members reports of implementation progress in a quality improvement initiative: findings from the Team Check-up Tool (TCT).
Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Defining and assessing context in healthcare implementation studies: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Integrating teamwork, clinician occupational well-being and patient safety - development of a conceptual framework based on a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2016Pooled it
- Measuring factors affecting implementation of health innovations: a systematic review of structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level measures.Implementation science : IS · 2013Pooled it
- Centers of value and the quest for meaning in faith development: A measurement approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Unintended consequences: a qualitative study exploring the impact of collecting implementation process data with phone interviews on implementation activities.Implementation science communications · 2020Article
- Advancing the pragmatic measurement of sustainment: a narrative review of measures.Implementation science communications · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the association between Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) measures and catheter-associated infections: results of two national collaboratives.BMJ quality & safety · 2017Article
- Addressing core challenges for the next generation of type 2 translation research and systems: the translation science to population impact (TSci Impact) framework.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTeam-based interventions are effective for improving safety and quality of healthcare. However, contextual factors, such as team functioning, leadership, and organizational support, can vary significantly across teams and affect the level of implementation success. Yet, the science for measuring context is immature. The goal of this study is to validate measures from a short instrument tailored to track dynamic context and progress for a team-based quality improvement (QI) intervention.
methods
designSecondary cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of data from a clustered randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a team-based quality improvement intervention to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates in intensive care units (ICUs).
settingForty-six ICUs located within 35 faith-based, not-for-profit community hospitals across 12 states in the U.S. POPULATION: Team members participating in an ICU-based QI intervention. MEASURES: The primary measure is the Team Check-up Tool (TCT), an original instrument that assesses context and progress of a team-based QI intervention. The TCT is administered monthly. Validation measures include CLABSI rate, Team Functioning Survey (TFS) and Practice Environment Scale (PES) from the Nursing Work Index. ANALYSIS: Temporal stability, responsiveness and validity of the TCT.
resultsWe found evidence supporting the temporal stability, construct validity, and responsiveness of TCT measures of intervention activities, perceived group-level behaviors, and barriers to team progress.
conclusionsThe TCT demonstrates good measurement reliability, validity, and responsiveness. By having more validated measures on implementation context, researchers can more readily conduct rigorous studies to identify contextual variables linked to key intervention and patient outcomes and strengthen the evidence base on successful spread of efficacious team-based interventions. QI teams participating in an intervention should also find data from a validated tool useful for identifying opportunities to improve their own implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.