Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29615014›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Assessing the implementation processes of a large-scale, multi-year quality improvement initiative: survey of health care providers.

Donna Goodridge, Masud Rana, Elizabeth L Harrison, Thomas Rotter, Roy Dobson, Gary Groot, Sonia Udod, Joshua Lloyd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Operational inefficiency and perceived quality in a paediatric day hospital: a lean-informed study of patient flow, caregiver and staff perceptions.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Donna GoodridgeCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada. donna.goodridge@usask.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8680-8646
Masud RanaDepartment of Community Health and Epidemiology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Elizabeth L HarrisonSchool of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Thomas RotterHealth Quality Programs, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
Roy DobsonCollege of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Gary GrootCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Sonia UdodFaculty of Nursing, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Joshua LloydCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.

Funding

College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBeginning in 2012, Lean was introduced to improve health care quality and promote patient-centredness throughout the province of Saskatchewan, Canada with the aim of producing coordinated, system-wide change. Significant investments have been made in training and implementation, although limited evaluation of the outcomes have been reported. In order to better understand the complex influences that make innovations such as Lean "workable" in practice, Normalization Process Theory guided this study. The objectives of the study were to: a) evaluate the implementation processes associated with Lean implementation in the Saskatchewan health care system from the perspectives of health care professionals; and b) identify demographic, training and role variables associated with normalization of Lean.

methodsLicensed health care professionals were invited through their professional associations to complete a cross-sectional, modified, online version of the NoMAD questionnaire in March, 2016. Analysis was based on 1032 completed surveys. Descriptive and univariate analyses were conducted. Multivariate multinomial regressions were used to quantify the associations between five NoMAD items representing the four Normalization Process Theory constructs (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring).

resultsMore than 75% of respondents indicated that neither sufficient training nor resources (collective action) had been made available to them for the implementation of Lean. Compared to other providers, nurses were more likely to report that Lean increased their workload. Significant differences in responses were evident between: leaders vs. direct care providers; nurses vs. other health professionals; and providers who reported increased workload as a result of Lean vs. those who did not. There were no associations between responses to normalization construct proxy items and: completion of introductory Lean training; participation in Lean activities; age group; years of professional experience; or employment status (full-time or part-time). Lean leader training was positively associated with proxy items reflecting coherence, cognitive participation and reflexive monitoring.

conclusionsFrom the perspectives of the cross-section of health care professionals responding to this survey, major gaps remain in embedding Lean into healthcare. Strategies that address the challenges faced by nurses and direct care providers, in particular, are needed if intended goals are to be achieved.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth PersonnelQuality ImprovementAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Facility AdministratorsHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of Health CareSaskatchewanSurveys and QuestionnairesHealth care professionalsLarge-scale transformationLeanNormalization process theoryNursesQuality improvementSurvey

Identifiers

PMID29615014
PMCPMC5883256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.