ArticleBMC health services research2024
Employees' experiences of a large-scale implementation in a public care setting: a novel mixed-method approach to content analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Scale to Evaluate Employee Experience: Evidence of Validity and Reliability in Regular Basic Education Teachers in the Peruvian Context.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch for evidence-based interventions and strategies for implementation continues. Yet there is a continued shortage of qualified health care staff while stress and burnout are common. Health care professionals' individual perceptions towards change needs to be considered to succeed in organisational change. It is therefore relevant to investigate how implementation processes affect employees within the health care sector. Challenges to implementation are especially large in the field of disability care. The present study aims to investigate employees' experiences of an ongoing large-scale implementation, and what they perceived as important to succeed in a complex clinical setting.
methodsSemi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with a self-selected sample of employees from a large and complex health care organisation responsible for public disability care in a centrally located Swedish region. A mixed-method approach adapted to content analysis was performed in a three-step process. In the first round, each unit of analysis was selected and then colour coded. In a second round, the coloured units were coded according to content analysis, and categories and concepts were compared and adjusted until the two researchers reached consensus. Finally, to further complement the content analysis, a quantitative analysis of the colour categories was made.
resultsIn general, employees experienced the implementation as being insufficient, yet opinions of the process of implementation were mixed. Most positive experiences were found in relation to the outcomes that the new method had on work effectiveness and patient care. Closely related topics like time constraints, uncertainties concerning the method and the need for supportive functions reoccurred in several concepts suggesting a relationship between differing contextual factors, implementation activities and fidelity. Also evident in the results were the strain on organisational and social work environment and the importance of managers' active leadership.
conclusionsImplementation processes are experienced as challenging for employees. Key facilitators are available support functions, clear leadership and time that is sufficient and kept sacrosanct. Leaders need to communicate how and why employees may experience implementation processes differently. The impact that organisational change has on work environment should be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.