Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29627818›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Building motivation to participate in a quality improvement collaborative in NHS hospital trusts in Southeast England: a qualitative participatory evaluation.

Mirza Lalani, Kate Hall, Mirek Skrypak, Chris Laing, John Welch, Peter Toohey, Sarah Seaholme, Thomas Weijburg, Laura Eyre, Martin Marshall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. What Does a Systems Approach to Quality Improvement Look Like in Practice?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

10 authors.

Mirza LalaniResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Kate HallUCLPartners, London, UK.
Mirek SkrypakUCLPartners, London, UK.
Chris LaingThe Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
John WelchUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Peter TooheyUCLPartners, London, UK.
Sarah SeaholmeUCLPartners, London, UK.
Thomas WeijburgUCLPartners, London, UK.
Laura EyreResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Martin MarshallResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study explores the barriers and facilitators that impact on the motivation of practitioners to participate in a quality improvement collaborative.

designA qualitative and formative evaluation using a participatory approach, the researcher-in-residence model which embraces the concept of 'coproducing' knowledge between researchers and practitioners using a range of research methods such as participant observation, interviews and documentary analysis. The design, creation and application of newly generated evidence are facilitated by the researcher through negotiation and compromise with team members.

participantsSenior and middle managers, doctors and nurses.

settingTwo hospitals in Southeast England participating in a Patient Safety Improvement Collaborative and the facilitator (host) of the collaborative, based in Central London.

resultsThe evaluation has revealed facilitators and barriers to motivation categorised under two main themes: (1) inherent motivation and (2) factors that influence motivation, interorganisational and intraorganisational features as well as external factors. Facilitators included collaborative 'champions,' individuals who drove the quality improvement agenda at a local level, raising awareness and inspiring colleagues. The collaborative itself acted as a facilitator, promoting shared learning as well as building motivation for participation. A key barrier was the lack of board engagement in the participating National Health Service organisations which may have affected motivation among front-line staff.

conclusionsCollaboratives maybe an important way of engaging practitioners in quality improvement initiatives. This study highlights that despite a challenging healthcare environment in the UK, there remains motivation among individuals to participate in quality improvement programmes as they recognise that improvement approaches may facilitate positive change in local clinical processes and systems. Collaboratives can harness this individual motivation to facilitate spread and adoption of improvement methodology and build engagement across their membership.

Indexed as

HospitalsMotivationQuality ImprovementState MedicineEnglandHumansPatient Safetyparticipatory evaluationquality improvement collaboratives

Identifiers

PMID29627818
PMCPMC5892757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.