Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36108526›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022

Determinants of inter-organizational implementation success: A mixed-methods evaluation of Veteran Directed Care.

Nina R Sperber, Edward J Miech, Alecia Slade Clary, Kathleen Perry, Merle Edwards-Orr, James L Rudolph, Courtney Harold Van Houtven, Kali S Thomas

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Nina R SperberCenter to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation (ADAPT), Durham VA Health Care System, USA; Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, USA; Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, USA. Electronic address: nina.sperber@va.gov.
Edward J MiechVA EXTEND QUERI, VA HSR&D Center for Health Information and Communication, Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, USA.
Alecia Slade ClaryReagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, USA.
Kathleen PerryVagelos College of Physicians & Surgeons, Columbia University, USA.
Merle Edwards-OrrApplied Self-Direction, USA.
James L RudolphBrown University School of Public Health, USA; Providence VA Medical Center, USA.
Courtney Harold Van HoutvenCenter to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation (ADAPT), Durham VA Health Care System, USA; Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, USA; Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, USA.
Kali S ThomasBrown University School of Public Health, USA; Providence VA Medical Center, USA.
Duke University · USJohn Brown University · USColumbia University · USReagan-Udall Foundation · USRichard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center · US

Funding

Evaluation of Veteran-Directed Home and Community Based ServicesI01HX002376 · VA · PROVIDENCE VA MEDICAL CENTER · PI RUDOLPH, JAMES L, SPERBER, NINA · 2019 to 2020
–
HSRD VA CDA 14-422HSRD VA CIN 13-410HSRD VA I01 HX002376
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVeteran Directed Care (VDC) aims to keep Veterans at risk for nursing home placement in their communities. VA medical centers (VAMCs) purchase VDC from third-party organizational providers who then partner with them during implementation. Experiences with VDC implementation have varied.

objectivesWe sought to identify conditions differentiating partnerships with higher enrollment (implementation success).

methodsWe conducted a case-based study with: qualitative data on implementation determinants two and eight months after program start, directed content analysis to assign numerical scores (-2 strong barrier to +2 strong facilitator), and mathematical modeling using Coincidence Analysis (CNA) to identify key determinants of implementation success. Cases consisted of VAMCs and partnering non-VAMC organizations who started VDC during 2017 or 2018. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided analysis.

resultsEleven individual organizations within five partnerships constituted our sample. Two CFIR determinants- Networks & Communication and External Change Agent-uniquely and consistently identified implementation success. At an inter-organizational partnership level, Networks & Communications and External Change Agent +2 (i.e., present as strong facilitators) were both necessary and sufficient. At a within-organization level, Networks & Communication +2 was necessary but not sufficient for the non-VAMC providers, whereas External Change Agent +2 was necessary and sufficient for VAMCs.

conclusionNetworks & Communication and External Change Agent played difference-making roles in inter-organizational implementation success, which differ by type of organization and level of analysis. IMPLICATIONS: This multi-level approach identified crucial difference-making conditions for inter-organizational implementation success when putting a program into practice requires partnerships across multiple organizations.

Indexed as

VeteransCommunicationHumansOrganizationsAgingConfigurational analysisImplementation scienceLong-term careLong-term services and supportsMixed-methodsSelf-directed care

Identifiers

PMID36108526
PMCPMC10174078
OpenAlexW4295278399

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.