Dataset Information

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study.

ABSTRACT: Standardized structured reporting (SSR) enables high-quality pathology reporting, but implementing SSR is slow. The objective of this study is to identify both barriers and facilitators that pathologists encounter in SSR, in order to develop tailored implementation tools to increase SSR usage. We used a mixed method design: a focus group interview helped to identify barriers and facilitators in SSR. The findings were classified into the following domains: innovation, individual professional, social setting, organization, and economic and political context. We used a web-based survey among Dutch pathologists to quantify the findings. Ten pathologists participated in the focus group interview, and 97 pathologists completed the survey. The results of both showed that pathologists perceive barriers related to SSR itself. Particularly its incompatibility caused lack of nuance (73%, n?=?97) in the standardized structured pathology report. Regarding the individual professional, knowledge about available SSR-templates was lacking (28%, n?=?97), and only 44% (n?=?94) of the respondents agreed that using SSR facilitates the most accurate diagnosis. Related to social setting, support from the multidisciplinary team members was lacking (45%, n?=?94). At organization level, SSR leads to extra work (52%, n?=?94) because of its incompatibility with other information systems (38%, n?=?93). Main facilitators of SSR were incorporation of speech recognition (54%, n?=?94) and improvement in communication during multidisciplinary team meetings (69%, n?=?94). Both barriers and facilitators existed in various domains. These factors can be used to develop implementation tools to encourage SSR usage.

SUBMITTER: Swillens JEM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6861434 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study.

Swillens J E M JEM Sluijter C E CE Overbeek L I H LIH Nagtegaal I D ID Hermens R P M G RPMG

Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology 20190703 5

Standardized structured reporting (SSR) enables high-quality pathology reporting, but implementing SSR is slow. The objective of this study is to identify both barriers and facilitators that pathologists encounter in SSR, in order to develop tailored implementation tools to increase SSR usage. We used a mixed method design: a focus group interview helped to identify barriers and facilitators in SSR. The findings were classified into the following domains: innovation, individual professional, soc ...[more]

PMID: 31270615

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify barriers and facilitators to international implementation of a prospective system for standardized outcomes measurement in cleft care.DesignCleft teams that have implemented the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Standard Set for cleft care were invited to participate in this 2-part qualitative study: (1) an exploratory survey among clinicians, health information technology professionals, and project coordinators, and (2) semistructured interviews of project leads. Thematic content analysis was performed, with organization of themes according to the dimensions of the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework: reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance.ResultsFour cleft teams in Europe and North America participated in this study. Thirteen participants completed exploratory questionnaires and 5 interviewees participated in follow-up interviews. Survey responses and thematic content analysis revealed common facilitators and barriers to implementation at all sites. Teams reach patients either via email or during the clinic visit to capture patient-reported outcomes. Adopting routine data collection is enhanced by aligning priorities at the organizational and cleft team level. Streamlining workflows and developing an efficient data collection platform are necessary early on, followed by pilot testing or stepwise implementation. Regular meetings and financial resources are crucial for implementing, sustaining, analyzing collected data, and providing feedback to health care professionals and patients. Fostering patient-centered care was articulated as a positive outcome, whereas time presented challenges across all RE-AIM dimensions.ConclusionsIdentified themes can inform ongoing implementation efforts. Intentionally investing time to lay a sound foundation early on will benefit every phase of implementation and help overcome barriers such as lack of support or motivation.

Project description:BackgroundStroke is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Visual impairments (VIs) affect 60% of stroke survivors, and have negative consequences for rehabilitation and post-stroke life. VIs after stroke are often overlooked and undertreated due to lack of structured routines for visual care after stroke. This study aims to identify and assess barriers and facilitators to the implementation of structured visual assessment after stroke in municipal health care services. The study is part of a larger knowledge translation project.MethodsEleven leaders and municipal interdisciplinary health care professionals participated in qualitative interviews. During two workshops, results from the interviews were discussed with 26 participants from municipal health care services and user representatives. Data from interviews and workshops were collected before the intervention was implemented and analyzed using content analysis.ResultsThe analysis identified individual and contextual barriers and facilitators. The individual barriers were related to the participants' experiences of having low competence of visual functions and vision assessment skills. They considered themselves as generalists, not stroke experts, and some were reluctant of change because of previous experiences of unsuccessful implementation projects. Individual facilitators were strong beliefs that including vision in stroke care would improve health care services. If experienced as useful and evidence based, the new vision routine would implement easier. Contextual barriers were experiences of unclear responsibility for vision care, lack of structured interdisciplinary collaboration and lack of formal stroke routines. Time constraints and practical difficulties with including the vision tool in current medical records were also expressed barriers. Contextual facilitators were leader support and acknowledgement, in addition to having a flexible work schedule.ConclusionsThis study shows that improving competence about VIs after stroke and skills in assessing visual functions are particularly important to consider when planning implementation of new vision routines in municipal health care services. Increased knowledge about the consequences of living with VIs after stroke, and the motivation to provide best possible care, were individual facilitators for changing clinical practice. Involving knowledge users, solutions for integrating new knowledge in existing routines, along with easily accessible supervision in own practise, are essential facilitators for promoting a successful implementation.

Project description:BackgroundEngagement in care is important for people living with HIV (PLH) to achieve optimal outcomes. Several strategies have been developed to improve client flow through the HIV care cascade, specifically targeting initiation of treatment, adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART), retention in care, and engagement in care. We have previously identified effective care cascade strategies in a systematic review. Initiation of ART could be improved by mobile health interventions, and changes in healthcare delivery. Adherence to ART could be improved by mobile health interventions, incentives, counselling, and psychotherapy. Retention in care could be improved by mobile health interventions, incentives, education, and electronic interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate barriers and facilitators to implementing these effective interventions in HIV clinics in Ontario, Canada.MethodsWe conducted a sequential explanatory mixed methods study. In the quantitative strand, we administered a survey to health workers who provide care to PLH to identify barriers and facilitators. In the qualitative strand, we conducted in-depth interviews informed by the theoretical domains framework (TDF) with health workers and with PLH to explain our quantitative findings. Qualitative and quantitative data were merged to create meta-inferences.ResultsTwenty health workers from 8 clinics in 9 cities in Ontario took the survey. Nine PLH and 10 health workers participated in the qualitative interviews. Clinics in Ontario implemented all the effective interventions identified from the literature for initiation of treatment, adherence to ART, and retention in care despite concerns about resources. Barriers to physical and financial access to care, the workload for tailored care, and expertise were identified by both health workers and PLH. Key facilitators were virtual care and client preparedness through education and peer support.ConclusionClinics in Ontario appear to implement several evidence-based strategies to improve PLH engagement. There is a need for more health workers with skills to address unique PLH needs. Virtual care is beneficial to both health workers and PLH.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare-related adverse events occur because of complex healthcare systems. The patient safety reporting system is a core component of patient safety initiatives in hospitals. However, hospital management often encounters a cultural barrier with its implementation and struggles to overcome the same. Implementation science would be useful for analysing implementation strategies. This study determines the effects of the implemented strategy on an increase in the number of patient safety reports and the determinants of successful implementation, using the implementation framework.MethodsMixed method analysis was performed in Fujita Health University Hospital (FHUH), a large volume hospital in Japan. We identified strategies to implement the patient safety reporting system by scrutinising internal documents using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The electronic reporting systems developed in 2004 in the FHUH and the number of reports were analysed using the staff data and hospital volumes.ResultsReports (n = 110,058) issued between April 2004 and March 2020 were analysed. The number of reports increased from 2004 to 2008 and from 2013 to 2019, reaching 14,037 reports per year. Between 2009 and 2012, the FHUH experienced a stagnation period where the number of reports were not increasing. From the qualitative materials, we identified 74 strategies which contributed to the implementation of the patient safety reporting system. Among these, the domain of 'intervention characteristics' in the CFIR contained 12 strategies, 'outer settings' contained 20, 'inner settings' contained 21, 'characteristics of individuals' contained 8, and 'process' contained 13. There were two concentrated periods of the implemented strategies, the number was 17 in 2007 and 10 in 2016. These concentrated periods preceded a remarkable increase in the number of patient safety reports.ConclusionsA safety culture had been fostered in FHUH in the study period. A relationship between number of strategies and development of a reporting culture was observed. The intensity of adequate strategies was needed for implementation of patient safety reporting system. Therefore, the implementation framework is useful for analysing patient safety initiatives for safety culture.

Project description:BackgroundPost pregnancy family planning includes both postpartum and post-abortion periods. Post pregnancy women remain one of the most vulnerable groups with high unmet need for family planning. This review aimed to describe and assess the quality of the evidence on implementation strategies, facilitators, and barriers to scaling up and sustaining post pregnancy family planning.MethodsElectronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and Global Index Medicus) were searched from inception to October 2022 for primary quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method reports on scaling up post pregnancy family planning. Abstracts, titles, and full-text papers were assessed according to the inclusion criteria to select studies regardless of country, language, publication status, or methodological limitations. Data were extracted and methodological quality assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The convergent integrated approach and a deductive thematic synthesis were used to identify themes and sub-themes of strategies to scale up post pregnancy family planning. The health system building blocks were used to summarize barriers and facilitators. GRADE-CERQual was used to assess our confidence in the findings.ResultsTwenty-nine reports (published 2005-2022) were included: 19 quantitative, 7 qualitative, and 3 mixed methods. Seven were from high-income countries, and twenty-two from LMIC settings. Sixty percent of studies had an unclear risk of bias. The included reports used either separate or bundled strategies for scaling-up post pregnancy family planning. These included strategies for healthcare infrastructure, policy and regulation, financing, human resource, and people at the point of care. Strategies that target the point of care (women and / or their partners) contributed to 89.66% (26/29) of the reports either independently or as part of a bundle. Point of care strategies increase adoption and coverage of post pregnancy contraceptive methods.ConclusionPost pregnancy family planning scaling up strategies, representing a range of styles and settings, were associated with improved post pregnancy contraceptive use. Factors that influence the success of implementing these strategies include issues related to counselling, integration in postnatal or post-abortion care, and religious and social norms.Trial registrationCenter for Open Science, OSF.IO/EDAKM.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To describe promoters and barriers to implementation of an airway safety quality improvement bundle from the perspective of interdisciplinary frontline clinicians and ICU quality improvement leaders. DESIGN:Mixed methods. SETTING:Thirteen PICUs of the National Emergency Airway Registry for Children network. INTERVENTION:Remote or on-site focus groups with interdisciplinary ICU staff. Two semistructured interviews with ICU quality improvement leaders with quantitative and qualitative data-based feedbacks. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Bundle implementation success (compliance) was defined as greater than or equal to 80% use for tracheal intubations for 3 consecutive months. ICUs were classified as early or late adopters. Focus group discussions concentrated on safety concerns and promoters and barriers to bundle implementation. Initial semistructured quality improvement leader interviews assessed implementation tactics and provided recommendations. Follow-up interviews assessed degree of acceptance and changes made after initial interview. Transcripts were thematically analyzed and contrasted by early versus late adopters. Median duration to achieve success was 502 days (interquartile range, 182-781). Five sites were early (median, 153 d; interquartile range, 146-267) and eight sites were late adopters (median, 783 d; interquartile range, 773-845). Focus groups identified common "promoter" themes-interdisciplinary approach, influential champions, and quality improvement bundle customization-and "barrier" themes-time constraints, competing paperwork and quality improvement activities, and poor engagement. Semistructured interviews with quality improvement leaders identified effective and ineffective tactics implemented by early and late adopters. Effective tactics included interdisciplinary quality improvement team involvement (early adopter: 5/5, 100% vs late adopter: 3/8, 38%; p = 0.08); ineffective tactics included physician-only rollouts, lack of interdisciplinary education, lack of data feedback to frontline clinicians, and misconception of bundle as research instead of quality improvement intervention. CONCLUSIONS:Implementation of an airway safety quality improvement bundle with high compliance takes a long time across diverse ICUs. Both early and late adopters identified similar promoter and barrier themes. Early adopter sites customized the quality improvement bundle and had an interdisciplinary quality improvement team approach.

Project description:Implementation of artificial intelligence systems for healthcare is challenging. Understanding the barriers and implementation strategies can impact their adoption and allows for better anticipation and planning. This study's objective was to create a detailed inventory of barriers to and strategies for AI implementation in healthcare to support advancements in methods and implementation processes in healthcare. A sequential explanatory mixed method design was used. Firstly, scoping reviews and systematic literature reviews were identified using PubMed. Selected studies included empirical cases of AI implementation and use in clinical practice. As the reviews were deemed insufficient to fulfil the aim of the study, data collection shifted to the primary studies included in those reviews. The primary studies were screened by title and abstract, and thereafter read in full text. Then, data on barriers to and strategies for AI implementation were extracted from the included articles, thematically coded by inductive analysis, and summarized. Subsequently, a direct qualitative content analysis of 69 interviews with healthcare leaders and healthcare professionals confirmed and added results from the literature review. Thirty-eight empirical cases from the six identified scoping and literature reviews met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Barriers to and strategies for AI implementation were grouped under three phases of implementation (planning, implementing, and sustaining the use) and were categorized into eleven concepts; Leadership, Buy-in, Change management, Engagement, Workflow, Finance and human resources, Legal, Training, Data, Evaluation and monitoring, Maintenance. Ethics emerged as a twelfth concept through qualitative analysis of the interviews. This study illustrates the inherent challenges and useful strategies in implementing AI in healthcare practice. Future research should explore various aspects of leadership, collaboration and contracts among key stakeholders, legal strategies surrounding clinicians' liability, solutions to ethical dilemmas, infrastructure for efficient integration of AI in workflows, and define decision points in the implementation process.

Dataset Information

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study.

Publications

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets