Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38664668›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Barriers and enablers for externally and internally driven implementation processes in healthcare: a qualitative cross-case study.

Hilda Bø Lyng, Eline Ree, Torunn Strømme, Terese Johannessen, Ingunn Aase, Berit Ullebust, Line Hurup Thomsen, Elisabeth Holen-Rabbersvik, Lene Schibevaag, David W Bates and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Hilda Bø LyngSHARE - Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway. hilda.b.lyng@uis.no.
Eline ReeSHARE - Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway.
Torunn StrømmeSHARE - Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway.
Terese JohannessenDepartment of Health and Nursing Sciences, Faculty of Health and Sports Science, University of Agder, Kristiansand, N-4604, Norway.
Ingunn AaseSHARE - Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway.
Berit UllebustSunnfjord municipality, Førde, N-6802, Norway.
Line Hurup ThomsenHelse Campus Stavanger, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway.
Elisabeth Holen-RabbersvikDepartment of Health and Nursing Sciences, Faculty of Health and Sports Science, University of Agder, Kristiansand, N-4604, Norway.
Lene SchibevaagSHARE - Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway.
David W BatesDivision of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Siri WiigSHARE - Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway.
University of Stavanger · NOUniversity of Agder · NOBrigham and Women's Hospital · USFram Flora (Norway) · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuality in healthcare is a subject in need of continuous attention. Quality improvement (QI) programmes with the purpose of increasing service quality are therefore of priority for healthcare leaders and governments. This study explores the implementation process of two different QI programmes, one externally driven implementation and one internally driven, in Norwegian nursing homes and home care services. The aim for the study was to identify enablers and barriers for externally and internally driven implementation processes in nursing homes and homecare services, and furthermore to explore if identified enablers and barriers are different or similar across the different implementation processes.

methodsThis study is based on an exploratory qualitative methodology. The empirical data was collected through the 'Improving Quality and Safety in Primary Care - Implementing a Leadership Intervention in Nursing Homes and Homecare' (SAFE-LEAD) project. The SAFE-LEAD project is a multiple case study of two different QI programmes in primary care in Norway. A large externally driven implementation process was supplemented with a tracer project involving an internally driven implementation process to identify differences and similarities. The empirical data was inductively analysed in accordance with grounded theory.

resultsEnablers for both external and internal implementation processes were found to be technology and tools, dedication, and ownership. Other more implementation process specific enablers entailed continuous learning, simulation training, knowledge sharing, perceived relevance, dedication, ownership, technology and tools, a systematic approach and coordination. Only workload was identified as coincident barriers across both externally and internally implementation processes. Implementation process specific barriers included turnover, coping with given responsibilities, staff variety, challenges in coordination, technology and tools, standardizations not aligned with work, extensive documentation, lack of knowledge sharing.

conclusionThis study provides understanding that some enablers and barriers are present in both externally and internally driven implementation processes, while other are more implementation process specific. Dedication, engagement, technology and tools are coinciding enablers which can be drawn upon in different implementation processes, while workload acted as the main barrier in both externally and internally driven implementation processes. This means that some enablers and barriers can be expected in implementation of QI programmes in nursing homes and home care services, while others require contextual understanding of their setting and work.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesNursing HomesQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementHumansLeadershipNorwayPrimary Health CareHome care servicesImplementationImplementation barriersImplementation enablersNursing homesQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID38664668
PMCPMC11046894
OpenAlexW4395467439

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.