Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35616176›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Evaluation of Normalization After Implementation of the Digital Dutch Obstetric Telephone Triage System: Mixed Methods Study With a Questionnaire Survey and Focus Group Discussion.

Bernice Engeltjes, Ageeth Rosman, Fedde Scheele, Christiaan Vis, Eveline Wouters

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Bernice EngeltjesAthena Institute for Transdisciplinary Research, Faculty of Science, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8631-2352
Ageeth RosmanDepartment of Healthcare Studies, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3751-2950
Fedde ScheeleAthena Institute for Transdisciplinary Research, Faculty of Science, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9593-257X
Christiaan VisDepartment of Neuro & Development Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8783-8487
Eveline WoutersDepartment of Tranzo, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8911-9398
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLPublic Health Service of Amsterdam · NLRotterdam University of Applied Sciences · NLTilburg University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Dutch Obstetric Telephone Triage System (DOTTS) was developed to improve the quality of acute obstetric care. To achieve optimal effect, the DOTTS should be adopted in the daily care process by triage staff.

objectiveThe primary aim was to evaluate the degree of implementation (ie, normalization) of the DOTTS, and the secondary aim was to evaluate which lessons can be learned from its current implementation in Dutch hospitals.

methodsAn evaluation study with a mixed methods design was performed. All triage staff in 9 Dutch hospitals that implemented the DOTTS before September 1, 2019, were invited to complete the Normalization Measure Development (NoMAD) questionnaire between December 2019 and July 2020. The questionnaire is based on the Normalization Process Theory (NPT). This self-reported questionnaire provides insights into the work people do in order to integrate and embed new practice in routine care. The NPT is based on the following 4 constructs: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring. Within the questionnaire, each construct is represented by 4-7 questions. Questions are scored on a 5-point normalization process scale. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis of questionnaire scores. Subsequently, the questionnaire findings were discussed during a focus group. Template analysis following the 4 constructs was used for analyzing the results of the focus group.

resultsOverall, 173 of 294 (58.8%) triage staff members completed the NoMAD questionnaire, and 90.2% (156/173) of the participants had used the DOTTS for over 6 months. The digital application was used as much as possible or always by 137 of 173 (79.2%) participants. The overall normalization process score was 3.77 (SD 0.36). The constructs coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring scored 4.01 (SD 0.47), 4.05 (SD 0.45), 3.5 (SD 0.45), and 3.72 (SD 0.47), respectively. Analysis of the focus group discussion showed that the added value of the DOTTS was seen as a quality improvement for the care of pregnant women. Dedication of the complete multidisciplinary implementation team was important for facilitating normalization. Support from the medical staff and proper use by all disciplines involved in the triage were seen as facilitating factors. Participants appreciated training and evaluation, and indicated a need for ongoing training and evaluation in relation to goal achievement.

conclusionsThe DOTTS has been integrated into normal care in daily practice. Evaluation by the NoMAD questionnaire provided a positive overall score. These results are in line with or, in some aspects, better than the results of other evaluation studies. Key factors in the normalization process of the DOTTS in obstetric triage are the shared added value for stakeholders, the dedication of the complete multidisciplinary implementation team, and implementation plans that are tailor made in the practical context of the hospital.

Indexed as

hierarchyimplementation strategymedical staffNormalization Process Theoryobstetric triage

Identifiers

PMID35616176
PMCPMC9250067
OpenAlexW4281748196

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.