Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38448960›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Implementation of large, multi-site hospital interventions: a realist evaluation of strategies for developing capability.

Janet C Long, Natalie Roberts, Emilie Francis-Auton, Mitchell N Sarkies, Hoa Mi Nguyen, Johanna I Westbrook, Jean-Frederic Levesque, Diane E Watson, Rebecca Hardwick, Kate Churruca and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

12 authors.

Janet C Long *Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. Janet.long@mq.edu.au.
Natalie Roberts *Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Emilie Francis-AutonAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Mitchell N SarkiesAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Hoa Mi NguyenAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Johanna I WestbrookAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Jean-Frederic LevesqueCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Diane E WatsonBureau of Health Information, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
Rebecca HardwickPeninsula Medical School, Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Kate ChurrucaAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Peter HibbertAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

Medical Research Futures Fund APP1178554
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study presents guidelines for implementation distilled from the findings of a realist evaluation. The setting was local health districts in New South Wales, Australia that implemented three clinical improvement initiatives as part of a state-wide program. We focussed on implementation strategies designed to develop health professionals' capability to deliver value-based care initiatives for multisite programs. Capability, which increases implementers' ability to cope with unexpected scenarios is key to managing change.

methodsWe used a mixed methods realist evaluation which tested and refined program theories elucidating the complex dynamic between context (C), mechanism (M) and outcome (O) to determine what works, for whom, under what circumstances. Data was drawn from program documents, a realist synthesis, informal discussions with implementation designers, and interviews with 10 key informants (out of 37 identified) from seven sites. Data analysis employed a retroductive approach to interrogate the causal factors identified as contributors to outcomes.

resultsCMO statements were refined for four initial program theories: Making it Relevant- where participation in activities was increased when targeted to the needs of the staff; Investment in Quality Improvement- where engagement in capability development was enhanced when it was valued by all levels of the organisation; Turnover and Capability Loss- where the effects of staff turnover were mitigated; and Community-Wide Priority- where there was a strategy of spanning sites. From these data five guiding principles for implementers were distilled: (1) Involve all levels of the health system to effectively implement large-scale capability development, (2) Design capability development activities in a way that supports a learning culture, (3) Plan capability development activities with staff turnover in mind, (4) Increased capability should be distributed across teams to avoid bottlenecks in workflows and the risk of losing key staff, (5) Foster cross-site collaboration to focus effort, reduce variation in practice and promote greater cohesion in patient care.

conclusionsA key implementation strategy for interventions to standardise high quality practice is development of clinical capability. We illustrate how leadership support, attention to staff turnover patterns, and making activities relevant to current issues, can lead to an emergent learning culture.

Indexed as

Data AnalysisHospitalsAustraliaHealth PersonnelHumansInvestmentsCapacity developmentChange managementImplementationLearning culture

Identifiers

PMID38448960
PMCPMC10918928

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.