Dataset Information

Sustaining Innovations in Complex Health Care Environments: A Multiple-Case Study of Rapid Response Teams.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Rapid response teams (RRTs) are one innovation previously deployed in U.S. hospitals with the goal to improve the quality of care. Sustaining RRTs is important to achieve the desired implementation outcomes, reduce the risk of program investment losses, and prevent employee disillusionment and dissatisfaction. This study sought to examine factors that do and do not support the sustainability of RRTs. METHODS:The study was conceptually guided by an adapted version of the Planning Model of Sustainability. A multiple-case study was conducted using a purposive sample of 2 hospitals with high RRT sustainability scores and 2 hospitals with low RRT sustainability scores. Data collection methods included (a) a hospital questionnaire that was completed by a nurse administrator at each hospital; (b) semistructured interviews with leaders, RRT members, and those activating RRT calls; and (c) a review of internal documents. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS:Few descriptive differences were found between hospitals. However, there were notable differences in the operationalization of certain factors between high- and low-sustainability hospitals. Additional sustainability factors other than those captured by the Planning Model of Sustainability were also identified. CONCLUSIONS:The sustainability of RRTs is optimized through effective operationalization of organizational and project design and implementation factors. Two additional factors-individual and team characteristics-should be included in the Planning Model of Sustainability and considered as potential facilitators (or inhibitors) of RRT sustainability.

SUBMITTER: Stolldorf DP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4940275 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sustaining Innovations in Complex Health Care Environments: A Multiple-Case Study of Rapid Response Teams.

Stolldorf Deonni P DP Havens Donna S DS Jones Cheryl B CB

Journal of patient safety 20200301 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>Rapid response teams (RRTs) are one innovation previously deployed in U.S. hospitals with the goal to improve the quality of care. Sustaining RRTs is important to achieve the desired implementation outcomes, reduce the risk of program investment losses, and prevent employee disillusionment and dissatisfaction. This study sought to examine factors that do and do not support the sustainability of RRTs.<h4>Methods</h4>The study was conceptually guided by an adapted version of the ...[more]

PMID: 26756725

Similar Datasets

Project description:The objectives of this paper are to: (1) identify contextual factors such as policy that impacted the implementation of community-based primary health care (CBPHC) innovations among 12 Canadian research teams and (2) describe strategies used by the teams to address contextual factors influencing implementation of CBPHC innovations. In primary care settings, consideration of contextual factors when implementing change has been recognized as critically important to success. However, contextual factors are rarely recorded, analyzed or considered when implementing change. The lack of consideration of contextual factors has negative implications not only for successfully implementing primary health care (PHC) innovations, but also for their sustainability and scalability. For this evaluation, data collection was conducted using self-administered questionnaires and follow-up telephone interviews with team representatives. We used a combination of directed and conventional content analysis approaches to analyze the questionnaire and interview data. Representatives from all 12 teams completed the questionnaire and 11 teams participated in the interviews; 40 individuals participated in this evaluation. Four themes representing contextual factors that impacted the implementation of CBPHC innovations were identified: (I) diversity of jurisdictions (II) complexity of interactions and collaborations (III) policy, and (IV) the multifaceted nature of PHC. The teams used six strategies to address these contextual factors including: (1) conduct an environmental scan at the beginning (2) maintaining engagement among partners and stakeholders by encouraging open and inclusive communication; (3) contextualizing the innovation for different settings; (4) anticipating and addressing changes, delays, and the need for additional resources; (5) fostering a culture of research and innovation among partners and stakeholders; and (6) ensuring information about the innovation is widely available. Implementing CBPHC innovations across jurisdictions is complex and involves navigating through multiple contextual factors. Awareness of the dynamic nature of context should be considered when implementing innovations.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Rapid evaluation was at the heart of National Health Service England's evaluation strategy of the new models of care vanguard programme. This was to facilitate the scale and spread of successful models of care throughout the health & social care system. The aim of this paper is to compare the findings of the two evaluations of the Enhanced health in Care Homes (EHCH) vanguard in Gateshead, one using a smaller data set for rapidity and one using a larger longitudinal data set and to investigate the implications of the use of rapid evaluations using interrupted time series (ITS) methods. METHODS:A quasi-experimental design study in the form of an ITS was used to evaluate the impact of the vanguard on secondary care use. Two different models are presented differing by timeframes only. The short-term model consisted of data for 11?months data pre and 20?months post vanguard. The long-term model consisted of data for 23?months pre and 34?months post vanguard. RESULTS:The cost consequences, including the cost of running the EHCH vanguard, were estimated using both a single tariff non-elective admissions methodology and a tariff per bed day methodology. The short-term model estimated a monthly cost increase of £73,408 using a single tariff methodology. When using a tariff per bed day, there was an estimated monthly cost increase of £14,315. The long-term model had, using a single tariff for non-elective admissions, an overall cost increase of £7576 per month. However, when using a tariff per bed-days, there was an estimated monthly cost reduction of £57,168. CONCLUSIONS:Although it is acknowledged that there is often a need for rapid evaluations in order to identify "quick wins" and to expedite learning within health and social care systems, we conclude that this may not be appropriate for quasi-experimental designs estimating effect using ITS for complex interventions. Our analyses suggests that care must be taken when conducting and interpreting the results of short-term evaluations using ITS methods, as they may produce misleading results and may lead to a misallocation of resources.

Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to describe practices that support collaboration in interprofessional primary health care teams, and identify performance indicators perceived to measure the impact of this collaboration from the perspective of interprofessional health providers.BackgroundDespite the surge of interprofessional primary health care models implemented across Canada, there is little evidence as to whether or not the intended outcomes of primary health care teams have been achieved. Part of the challenge is determining the most appropriate measures that can demonstrate the value of collaborative care. To date, little remains known about performance measurement from the providers contributing to the collaborative care process in interprofessional primary care teams. Having providers from a range of disciplinary backgrounds assist in the development of performance measures can help identify measures most relevant to demonstrate the value of collaborative care on the intended outcomes of interprofessional primary care models.MethodsA qualitative study; part of a larger mixed methods developmental evaluation to examine performance measurement in interprofessional primary health care teams. A stakeholder workshop was conducted at an annual association meeting of interprofessional primary health care teams in the province of Ontario, Canada. Six questions guided the workshop groups and participant responses were documented on worksheets and flip charts. All responses were collected and entered verbatim into a word document. Qualitative analytic strategies were applied to each question.FindingsA total of 283 primary health care providers from 14 health professions working in interprofessional primary health care teams participated. Top three elements of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 628) were communication (n = 146), co-treatment (n = 112) and patient-based conferences (n = 81). Top three performance indicators currently used to demonstrate the value of interprofessional collaboration (total n = 241) were patient experience (n = 71), patient health status (n = 35) and within team referrals (n = 30).

Project description:BackgroundRecruiting, retaining and meeting increasing demand for experienced, qualified nurses is an issue of concern for all health care systems. The UK has been creating clinical career structures for nurses that include innovative posts known as nurse consultants. While the numbers overall appear to have grown over the last eleven years, there is evidence that in some specialities and regions the numbers are decreasing. This paper considers the factors that sustain or curtail workforce innovations through the case example of a cohort of nurse consultants established in one community health service in England.MethodsA mixed method case study evaluation was undertaken over three years, using interviews, observations, documentary analysis and questionnaires. The final element of data collection was obtained three years later. Data was anonymised, analysed using a framework method and then integrated using a narrative synthesis.ResultsTen nurse consultant posts were created over a period of two years (2002-2004). Within two years only five posts remained and within five years (2009) only two part time posts, with the original appointees, remained. When the nurse consultants left their posts, these were not replaced. In exploring the interaction between the innovation (the nurse consultant posts), the adoptees (the senior staff in the organisation) and the context (the immediate service colleagues, the service organisation and commissioners as well as the broader NHS policy context) three key factors were identified as influential in the demise of the posts. These were: a) the extent to which there was support for individual nurses rather than the post, b) the extent to which there was an unambiguous and uncontested clinical service requirement for a nurse consultant and c) the extent to which finances for the post were judged as being used to best effect in a service setting.ConclusionsThis case study example demonstrates how tantalisingly close the nurse consultant initiative came to achieving a clinical career pathway for nurses in community services but more work was required to normalise clinician and managers' beliefs in the relevance and need for the role. Those looking to embed these types of nursing workforce innovations should pay due regard to these issues.

Project description:BackgroundNursing care quality varies between hospitals, and even between departments within the same institution. Suboptimal care can have deleterious consequences for patients such as lengthened hospital stay, nosocomial infection, pressure ulcers or death. Experts recommend the implementation of nursing performance improvement systems to assess team performance and monitor patient outcomes and efficiency savings. In practice, these systems are expected to include feedback processes directed towards nursing teams and interprofessional staff in order to facilitate adjustments and improve their performance. Unfortunately, feedback appears somewhat haphazard and, at times, overlooked. This could be explained by an ongoing absence of clear recommendations. As a result, feedback effects are inconclusive: some teams improve their practice, others do not. Although feedback has been conceptualised and studied from different theoretical perspectives, ongoing empirical inconsistencies remain unexplained. The goal of this rapid realist review protocol is to develop a theory that explains how feedback shared with interprofessional health care teams shape nursing performance improvement systems.MethodThis study follows standard guidelines established for realist reviews. Mechanisms at work will be analysed using Actor-Network Theory. All scientific documents are selected from five databases, are published in both English and French between 2010 and 2018, and include empirical research, reviews and grey literature. First, selection of documents will proceed on the basis of titles and abstracts; followed by a second selection by reading the remaining full texts. Inclusion criteria and a data extraction form will be pilot tested with 40 articles prior to completion by two reviewers. Data will be summarised in the form of [context, mechanism, outcome] equations to theorise operational feedback.DiscussionThe innovative combination of Actor-Network Theory with a realist methodology holds promise for the identification of explanatory equations in complex systems and theory development. A rapid realist review is relevant to address an enduring knowledge gap which requires theory development. This preliminary study lays the groundwork for a pioneering theory on feedback in nursing performance improvement systems that will subsequently inform a multiple case study.Systematic review registrationProspero CRD42018110128.

Project description:The key to high impact health services is institutionalizing and sustaining programme evaluation. Uganda represents a success story in the use of a specific programme evaluation method: Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS). Institutionalization is defined by two C's: competent programme evaluators and control mechanisms that effectively use evaluation data to improve health services. Sustainability means continued training and funding for the evaluation approach. Social science literature that researches institutionalization has emphasized 'stability', whereas in global health, the issue is determining how to improve the impact of services by 'changing' programmes. In Uganda, we measured the extent of the institutionalization and sustainability of evaluating programmes that produce change in nine districts sampled to represent three largely rural regions and varying levels of effective health programmes. We used the proportion of mothers with children aged 0-11?months who delivered in a health facility as the principal indicator to measure programme effectiveness. Interviews and focus groups were conducted among directors, evaluation supervisors, data collectors in the district health offices, and informant interviews conducted individually at the central government level. Seven of the nine districts demonstrated a high level of institutionalization of evaluation. The two others had only conducted one round of programme evaluation. When we control for the availability of health facilities, we find that the degree of institutionalization is moderately related to the prevalence of the delivery of a baby in a health facility. Evaluation was institutionalized at the central government level. Sustainability existed at both levels. Several measures indicate that lessons from the nine district case studies may be relevant to the 74 districts that had at least two rounds of programme evaluation. We note that there is an association between the evaluation data being used to change health services, and the four separate indicators being used to measure women's health and child survival services. We conclude that the two C's (competent evaluators and control mechanisms) have been critical for sustaining programme evaluation in Uganda.

Project description:Recently, new models for the integration of oral health into primary care have been proposed. However, these models may be adopted by a variety of health care systems, and will reach successful outcomes only if they can be adapted to suit the local context. To this end, the objective of this study was to explore the perceptions of Quebec primary health care teams on the integration of oral health into primary care. A qualitative approach and interpretive description methodology were used to conduct the study within a case-study design. Purposeful sampling with maximum variation and snowball technique were used for recruitment of study participants. Seventy-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews and five focus groups were conducted with primary health care teams including health care providers and managers working in a rural and an urban health care center. The interview guide and study conceptual framework were based on the Rainbow model. Data collection and data analyses were conducted concurrently and continued until saturation was achieved. To analyze the data, four phases of qualitative analysis were followed. The thematic analysis included interview debriefing, transcript coding, data display, and interpretation. Data analysis was conducted both manually and with the use of Atlas-ti software. A total of four themes emerged from the interviews and focus group discussions. These themes covered all domains of the study theoretical model and included: 1) drivers of integration; 2) importance of integration; 3) professionals' role in integrated care; and 4) barriers and enablers of integration. In general, most of the barriers expressed by study participants were related to the organizational and system domains of integration. Primary health care teams who provide care in rural and urban areas in Quebec expressed their concerns on the absence of integrated oral health services. Implementation of governance policies, the prioritization of educational and management measures as well as inter-professional collaboration toward innovative care models could facilitate this integration.

Dataset Information

Sustaining Innovations in Complex Health Care Environments: A Multiple-Case Study of Rapid Response Teams.

Publications

Sustaining Innovations in Complex Health Care Environments: A Multiple-Case Study of Rapid Response Teams.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure