Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31783853›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

A realist evaluation to identify contexts and mechanisms that enabled and hindered implementation and had an effect on sustainability of a lean intervention in pediatric healthcare.

Rachel Flynn, Thomas Rotter, Dawn Hartfield, Amanda S Newton, Shannon D Scott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Employment and deployment of additional staff roles in general practice: a realist evaluation of what works for whom, how, and why.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Rachel FlynnFaculty of Nursing, Level 3, Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, University of Alberta, 11405 87 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada. rachel.flynn@ualberta.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2980-7441
Thomas RotterHealthcare Quality Programs, Queen's University School of Nursing, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada.
Dawn HartfieldDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, 11405 87 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Amanda S NewtonDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, 11405 87 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Shannon D ScottFaculty of Nursing, Level 3, Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, University of Alberta, 11405 87 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2012, the Saskatchewan Ministry for Health mandated a system-wide Lean transformation. Research has been conducted on the implementation processes of this system-wide Lean implementation. However, no research has been done on the sustainability of these Lean efforts. We conducted a realist evaluation on the sustainability of Lean in pediatric healthcare. We used the context (C) + mechanism (M) = outcome (O) configurations (CMOcs) heuristic to explain under what contexts, for whom, how and why Lean efforts are sustained or not sustained in pediatric healthcare.

methodsWe employed a case study research design. Guided by a realist evaluation framework, we conducted qualitative realist interviews with various stakeholder groups across four pediatric hospital units 'cases' at one acute hospital. Interview data was analyzed using an integrated approach of CMOc categorization coding, CMOc connecting and pattern matching.

resultsWe conducted thirty-two interviews across the four cases. Five CMOcs emerged from our realist interview data. These configurations illustrated a 'ripple-effect' from implementation outcomes to contexts for sustainability. Sense-making and staff engagement were prominent mechanisms to the sustainment of Lean efforts. Failure to trigger these mechanisms resulted in resistance. The implementation approach used influenced mechanisms and outcomes for sustainability, more so than Lean itself. Specifically, the language, messaging and training approaches used triggered mechanisms of innovation fatigue, poor 'sense-making' and a lack of engagement for frontline staff. The mandated, top-down, externally led nature of implementation and lack of customization to context served as potential pitfalls. Overall, there was variation between leadership and frontline staff's perceptions on how embedded Lean was in their contexts, and the degree to which participants supported Lean sustainability.

conclusionsThis research illuminates important contextual factors and mechanisms to the process of Lean sustainment that can be applicable to those implementing systems changes. Future work is needed to continue to develop the science on the sustainability of interventions for healthcare improvement.

Indexed as

PediatricsChildHealth Services ResearchHumansImplementation ScienceTotal Quality ManagementLeanNormalizationQuality improvementRealist evaluationSustainability

Identifiers

PMID31783853
PMCPMC6884784

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.