Dataset Information

Implementation of government-directed policy in the hospital setting: a modified Delphi study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In the last 20 years governments have sought to introduce policy that improves the quality of care provided in hospitals, yet little research has been done to understand how these policies are implemented, factors that affect the implementation process or what should be considered by decision-makers during policy development or implementation planning. Experts with real-life experience in the introduction and implementation of policy are best placed to provide valuable insight into practical issues that affect implementation and the associated outcomes of these policies. METHODS:A modified Delphi study of experts in hospital policy development and implementation was undertaken to investigate factors influencing the implementation of government-directed policy in the hospital setting. This study built on the findings of two previous studies - a qualitative study of clinician perspectives of policy implementation and a systematic review and meta-synthesis, in which common contextual factors and policy characteristics associated with policy implementation were ascertained. International experts with extensive experience in government-directed policy implementation at global, national, corporate, jurisdictional and organisational levels were asked to provide opinions on predetermined factors and the feasibility of considering these in policy development and implementation planning. Survey design and analysis was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS:Eleven experts from four countries and with different health system perspectives participated in the study. Consensus was reached on the importance of all predetermined factors in the first survey round with additional factors for investigation highlighted by participants for examination in subsequent rounds. On study completion, expert consensus was reached on 24 factors of importance; only 20 of these factors reached consensus for feasibility. CONCLUSIONS:Study findings indicated that, whilst there are multiple factors of importance in policy implementation across all Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains, some factors, such as establishment of roles and responsibilities for implementation and organisational lines of accountability, are feasible for consideration at a hospital level only. In addition, four factors did not reach consensus in terms of feasibility, indicating that it may not be practical to consider all factors of importance when implementing policy; this has important implications for implementation planning and resource allocation.

SUBMITTER: Havers SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6880558 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of government-directed policy in the hospital setting: a modified Delphi study.

Havers S M SM Martin E E Wilson A A Hall L L

Health research policy and systems 20191127 1

<h4>Background</h4>In the last 20 years governments have sought to introduce policy that improves the quality of care provided in hospitals, yet little research has been done to understand how these policies are implemented, factors that affect the implementation process or what should be considered by decision-makers during policy development or implementation planning. Experts with real-life experience in the introduction and implementation of policy are best placed to provide valuable insight ...[more]

PMID: 31775771

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGovernment purchase of social forces to participate in old age care services can release the burden of social care. Current research on performance evaluation in this field mainly focussed on the establishment of appropriate evaluation indices. However, discussion on the policy implementation deviation is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of China's local government purchase of old age care services, analyse the characteristics of related policies and explore their deviation.MethodsThe persons who participated in the Training of the Trainer (ToT) organized by the Red Cross Society were enrolled. The policy documents were obtained from the official websites. The K-means cluster was used to determine the project performance grades. We compared the project performance grades between service objects and undertakers with different characteristics utilizing the non-parametric test. Based on the framework of 'Collaborative Participation - Project Performance Objective', we analysed the content of relevant policy aiding by NVivo 12.ResultsData of project performance were collected from 306 participants. The standardized mean score of the efficiency dimension was the lowest (0.70 ± 0.24). The projects were divided into four grades: poor (17.0%), average (27.5%), good (12.4%) and excellent (43.1%). There were statistically significant differences in project performance grades only between advanced ageing groups (Z = 2.429, P = 0.015). As well, the policy also mentioned that the services focus should be tilted towards the oldest old. The purchasers mainly involved the Ministry of Civil Affairs and Health management departments in the policy. Respite services were less mentioned in the responsibilities of the undertakers. The requirement for efficiency and effectiveness was mentioned in less than half of the policy documents.ConclusionPolicy attention is needed for the responsibilities and functions of the intermediate purchasing force, as well as more precise directions and responsibilities of undertakers. The purchasers and undertakers should improve management abilities and capacity of old age care services and focus on associated factors to achieve the best marginal benefit. In addition, the embedded performance evaluation needs to be updated periodically to bridge the deviation between policy implementation and policy formulation.

Project description:BackgroundResearch priority setting (RPS) studies are necessary to close the significant gap between the scientific evidence produced and the evidence stakeholders need. Their findings can make resource allocation in research more efficient. However, no general framework for conducting an RPS study among public health stakeholders exists. RPS studies in public health are rare and no such study has been previously conducted and published in Germany. Therefore, we aimed to investigate which research topics in public health are prioritised by relevant stakeholders in Germany.MethodsOur RPS study consisted of a scoping stage and a Delphi stage each split into two rounds. Firstly, we invited members of the German Public Health Association to gather expert insights during two initial workshops. Next, we defined the relevant stakeholder groups and recruited respondents. Thereafter, we collected research topics and assessment criteria with the respondents in the first Delphi round and aggregated the responses through content analysis. Finally, we asked the respondents to rate the research topics with the assessment criteria in the second Delphi round.ResultsIn total, 94 out of the 140 invited public health organisations nominated 230 respondents for the Delphi study of whom almost 90% participated in both Delphi rounds. We compiled a comprehensive list of 76 research topics that were rated and ranked by several assessment criteria. We split the research topics into two types, substantive research topics and methodological-theoretical research topics respectively, to ensure the comparability among the research topics. In both types of research topics-substantive research topics and methodological-theoretical research topics-the respective top five ranked research topics hardly differed between public health researchers and public health practitioners. However, clear differences exist in the priority ranking of many (non-top priority) research topics between the stakeholder groups.ConclusionsThis research demonstrates that it is possible, with limited resources, to prioritise research topics for public health at the national level involving a wide range of pertinent stakeholders. The results can be used by research funding institutions to initiate calls for research projects with an increased relevance for health and/or scientific progress.

Project description:BackgroundMaternal health outcomes in the USA are far worse than in peer nations. Increasing implementation research in maternity care is critical to addressing quality gaps and unwarranted variations in care. Implementation research priorities have not yet been defined or well represented in the plans for maternal health research investments in the USA.MethodsThis descriptive study used a modified Delphi method to solicit and rank research priorities at the intersection of implementation science and maternal health through two sequential web-based surveys. A purposeful, yet broad sample of researchers with relevant subject matter knowledge was identified through searches of published articles and grant databases. The surveys addressed five implementation research areas in maternal health: (1) practices to prioritize for broader implementation, (2) practices to prioritize for de-implementation, (3) research questions about implementation determinants, (4) research questions about implementation strategies, and (5) research questions about methods/measures.ResultsOf 160 eligible researchers, 82 (51.2%) agreed to participate. Participants were predominantly female (90%) and White (75%). Sixty completed at least one of two surveys. The practices that participants prioritized for broader implementation were improved postpartum care, perinatal and postpartum mood disorder screening and management, and standardized management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. For de-implementation, practices believed to be most impactful if removed from or reduced in maternity care were cesarean delivery for low-risk patients and routine discontinuation of all psychiatric medications during pregnancy. The top methodological priorities of participants were improving the extent to which implementation science frameworks and measures address equity and developing approaches for involving patients in implementation research.ConclusionsThrough a web-based Delphi exercise, we identified implementation research priorities that researchers consider to have the greatest potential to improve the quality of maternity care in the USA. This study also demonstrates the feasibility of using modified Delphi approaches to engage researchers in setting implementation research priorities within a clinical area.

Dataset Information

Implementation of government-directed policy in the hospital setting: a modified Delphi study.

Publications

Implementation of government-directed policy in the hospital setting: a modified Delphi study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets