ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2025
Exploring the implementation of national health and social care standards in Ireland: A qualitative descriptive study.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of clinical practice guidelines using the Plan-Do-Study-Act framework: The methodology and experiences of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Health Informatics Infrastructure Registry Study on gestational diabetes mellitus.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025Article
- Exploring the implementation of national health and social care standards in Ireland: A qualitative descriptive study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- The co-design of a digitally supported intervention for selecting implementation tools and actions for standards (SITAS).BMC health services research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNational health and social care standards are complex, quality improvement interventions. Standards typically describe a process and/or outcome of safe, quality, person-centred care according to best evidence. Currently, there are 11 national standards that apply to diverse services in Ireland including residential centres, acute hospitals and rehabilitation and community inpatient healthcare services. A better understanding of contextual factors influencing implementation will inform decision-making when selecting implementation strategies to enhance the implementation of standards.
aimTo explore experiences of implementing national health and social care standards and secondly, to identify enablers and barriers to implementation with stakeholders from across multiple levels of the health system.
designA qualitative descriptive study.
methodsWe conducted six focus groups and eight individual interviews from October to November 2021 with stakeholders at system level (n = 14), organizational level (n = 14) and individual level (n = 10). Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsSix themes were generated; (1) Top-down, bottom-up, a team approach: everybody together, we are all involved, we are all responsible, (2) Support tools: accessible tools and bite-size material pertaining to standards will support us to implement standards, (3) Empower with knowledge: increase awareness and understanding of standards, make them relatable in practice so we can make sense of them, (4) A system-wide malaise: we do not have the bandwidth to implement standards, (5) Follow the leader: we need a lead person at every level to inspire implementation, (6) A bi-directional influence: we know inspections drive quality improvements but we still feel trepidation around inspection outcomes.
conclusionKey enablers identified related to teamwork, support tools, leadership and inspections. Key barriers related to workforce issues, a lack of awareness of standards and fear of inspection outcomes. Our findings can be incorporated into strategies to support implementation of standards, ultimately for the benefit of service-users. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The enablers and barriers described in this study reflect the importance of organizational factors in the implementation of standards. Interdisciplinary teams can infer from these findings, which enablers and barriers apply to their own context. These findings can inform decision-making when selecting strategies that can be effective in supporting the implementation of standards. REPORTING
methodWe have adhered to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.