Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33933092›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Digitalisation of municipal healthcare collaboration with volunteers: a case study applying normalization process theory.

Erica Fredriksen, Elin Thygesen, Carl E Moe, Santiago Martinez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Digital Transformation in Healthcare: Technology Acceptance and Its Applications.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Erica FredriksenFaculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, PB 422, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway. erica.fredriksen@uia.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7230-7050
Elin ThygesenFaculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, PB 422, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway.
Carl E MoeFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Agder, PB 422, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway.
Santiago MartinezFaculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, PB 422, 4604, Kristiansand, Norway.
University of Agder · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing use of volunteers in healthcare requires structured collaboration between healthcare services and volunteers. The aim of this research was to explore critical issues and strategies in the implementation process of a digital solution for collaboration with and coordination of volunteers in municipal healthcare services.

methodsQualitative data collection was used to study implementation of a digital system for collaboration with volunteers in three Norwegian municipalities. Three rounds of interviews were conducted with healthcare employees from a volunteer centre and from municipality healthcare units in three municipalities: before implementation, and 6 and 12 months after deployment. Observations of healthcare employees training and use of the system were also done.

resultsAn inductive analysis resulted in eleven themes that were grouped based on the four constructs of the normalisation process theory (NPT), plus two themes that fall outside those constructs. Coherence (understanding of the intervention) was high among the employees prior to the intervention. They expected the system to meet several of their needs and increase efficiency, structure and overview. In addition, they expected the system to benefit recruitment strategies along with their matching processes. Cognitive participation (engagement and commitment towards the intervention): employees from two of the municipalities reported absence of leadership and management guidance during the process, management of expectations and clarification of their roles. In the third, there was high engagement and management involvement in the implementation process. Collective action (whether the intervention is carried out): the employees reported time-consuming preparations. Engagement varied between the municipalities. There was a lack of commitment in two due to ongoing reorganisation, in these, the system was partly or not implemented. The third municipality implemented and fully piloted the system. Reflexive monitoring (appraisal towards the system and its impact on practice): the employees learned throughout testing of the system and realised that there were several benefits that could improve their working routines.

conclusionCrucial aspects for implementation of the digital tool for collaboration with volunteers include having structure "in place", establishing policies for involving volunteers, defining clear roles and expectations and involving management and key people ("champions") to drive the implementation.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelVolunteersDelivery of Health CareHealth FacilitiesHumansNorwayQualitative ResearchCollaborationCoordinationDigital systemHealthcareImplementationVolunteers

Identifiers

PMID33933092
PMCPMC8088692
OpenAlexW3159175510

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.