Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38087393›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2023

Moving behavioral interventions in nursing homes from planning to action: a work system evaluation of a urinary tract infection toolkit implementation.

James H Ford, Anna T Nora, Christopher J Crnich

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03520010 (A Cluster Randomized Trial to Assess the Impact of Facilitated Implementation on Antibiotic Stewardship in Wisconsin Nursing Homes), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

NCT03520010 nacompletednot on this map

A Cluster Randomized Trial to Assess the Impact of Facilitated Implementation on Antibiotic Stewardship in Wisconsin Nursing Homes

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Wisconsin, MadisonRan2018 to 2021Enrolled338ConditionsUTI - Urinary Tract InfectionArmsExternally-facilitated implementation, Internally-driven implementation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James H FordSocial and Administrative Sciences Division, University of Wisconsin School of Pharmacy, Madison, WI, USA. jhfordii@wisc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3045-2414
Anna T NoraWilliam S. Middleton VA Hospital, Madison, WI, USA.
Christopher J CrnichWilliam S. Middleton VA Hospital, Madison, WI, USA.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USWilliam S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplementation evaluations based on a hybrid deductive-inductive approach provide a detailed understanding of organizational choices to introduce and implement complex interventions and may help explain implementation success or failure. However, such evaluations may not be feasible due to resource constraints. Qualitative analyses of artifacts collected for other purposes during implementation may represent a cost-effective method to understand program implementation when robust evaluations are not feasible. This study used a work systems evaluation of how nursing homes (NHs) implemented a urinary tract infection (UTI) recognition and management improvement toolkit.

methodsThirty NHs participated in a randomized control trial in which intervention NHs (n = 12) were assigned a clinical coach who employed a standard template to structure coach calls with the NH champion. A hybrid inductive-deductive approach, using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model, characterized three action domains related to (1) engagement of staff and providers, (2) distribution of toolkit elements, and (3) toolkit use.

resultsA total of 369 coded segments from 148 coach notes generated by three coaches working with 18 NH champions were examined. Planned changes (n = 203) were more frequent compared to actual changes (n = 169). While most NHs quickly engaged staff and providers, which leadership appeared to support, engagement actions were hindered in some NHs due to champion instability or extended champion or medical director absences. Dissemination of materials to family and providers and distribution of tools to staff occurred quickly in 75% of NHs, although delays were encountered in some NHs, usually because of champion instability.

conclusionsImplementing NH practice change is challenging, and studies examining actions to support planned versus actual change in this setting are limited. The application of the SEIPS model to coach notes collected during the implementation of a structured behavioral intervention to improve the recognition and management of UTI in NHs generated unique insights into the work system and how staff attempted to implement changes. This study identified several factors that interfered with progression from planning to actual change. Future studies are needed to better understand how to best support change interventions in NHs.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03520010 , Registered May 9, 2018.

Indexed as

Change managementCoach notesImplementation scienceIMUNIFINursing homesPlanned versus actual changesQuality improvementSEIPSUrinary tract infections

Identifiers

PMID38087393
PMCPMC10714494
OpenAlexW4389624561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.