Dataset Information

The transfer of knowledge on integrated care among five European regions: a qualitative multi-method study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To examine how the knowledge transfer processes unfolded within SCIROCCO, a EU funded project (3rd Health Programme (2014-2020)) that aimed to facilitate the process of knowledge sharing across five European regions, to speed up adoption and scaling-up of integrated care initiatives. METHODS:A qualitative multi-method design was used. Data collection methods included focus groups, project documents and action plans of the regions. The data was analysed using a qualitative content-analysis procedure, which was guided by the frameworks of knowledge exchange and the why, whose, what, how framework for knowledge mobilisers. RESULTS:All five components (including the themes) of knowledge exchange could be identified in the approach developed on the knowledge transfer processes. The four questions and accompanying categories of the framework of knowledge mobilisation were also identified to a large degree. CONCLUSIONS:The observed incorporation of distinct forms of knowledge from multiple sources and the observed dynamic and fluid knowledge transfer processes both suggest that SCIROCCO developed a comprehensive knowledge transfer approach aiming to enable the adoption and scaling-up of integrated care. Overall, the multi-method qualitative nature of this research has allowed some new and practical insights in the knowledge transfer activities on integrated care between several European regions. To obtain a clear understanding of the content of the knowledge transfer approaches, which could assist the operationalising of models to support the evaluation of knowledge transfer activities, it is strongly recommended that further research of this type should be conducted in other research settings.

SUBMITTER: Grooten L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6942405 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The transfer of knowledge on integrated care among five European regions: a qualitative multi-method study.

Grooten Liset L Vrijhoef Hubertus Johannes Maria HJM Alhambra-Borrás Tamara T Whitehouse Diane D Devroey Dirk D

BMC health services research 20200103 1

<h4>Background</h4>To examine how the knowledge transfer processes unfolded within SCIROCCO, a EU funded project (3rd Health Programme (2014-2020)) that aimed to facilitate the process of knowledge sharing across five European regions, to speed up adoption and scaling-up of integrated care initiatives.<h4>Methods</h4>A qualitative multi-method design was used. Data collection methods included focus groups, project documents and action plans of the regions. The data was analysed using a qualitati ...[more]

PMID: 31900146

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The SCaling IntegRated Care in COntext (SCIROCCO) project tested a step-based scaling up strategy to explore what and how to scale up integrated care initiatives in five European regions. To gain a profound understanding of which factors influence the implementation of this strategy, the objective of this study was to assess the extent to which the SCIROCCO strategy was implemented as planned. DESIGN:Multimethod study. METHODS:The extended version of the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity was used to evaluate what factors influence the implementation of the scaling up strategy. Data were collected in the five participating European regions during the intervention period. Data collection methods included: key informant interviews, focus groups, questionnaire studies and project documents. RESULTS:All three main steps of the scaling up strategy were implemented with acceptable fidelity. Variations were observed in the duration of implementing the steps in the regions. Also, variations were observed in the coverage of experts to participate in the steps of the strategy. Several factors were observed to influence the implementation: facilitation conditions (ie, good coordination for implementation) and participant responsiveness (ie, a positive experience of participants in the organised study visits). Factors that may have moderated adherence to the original plan of the strategy were found in facilitating conditions (ie, in the flexible approach), participant recruitment factors (ie, adaptions of the procedure by the regions) and contextual factors (ie, the level of development of integrated care). CONCLUSION:This was the first study to assess implementation fidelity of a European project that used a step-based scaling up strategy in five European regions. Similar European projects that are based on collaboration between several European regions can learn from the lessons captured in SCIROCCO and can become more aware of the facilitating factors and pitfalls of implementing such projects.

Project description:Although examining perspectives of patients on integrated palliative care organisation is essential, available literature is largely based on administrative data or healthcare professionals' perspectives.(1) Providing insight into the composition and quality of care networks of patients receiving palliative care and (2) describing perceived integration between healthcare professionals within these networks and its association with overall satisfaction.Cross-sectional explorative design.We recruited 157 patients (62% cancer, 25% chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 13% chronic heart failure, mean age 68?years, 55% female) from 23 integrated palliative care initiatives in Belgium, Germany, the United Kingdom, Hungary and the Netherlands.About 33% reported contact with a palliative care specialist and 48% with a palliative care nurse. Relationships with palliative care specialists were rated significantly higher than other physicians ( p?<?0.001). Compared to patients with cancer, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio?=?0.16, confidence interval (0.04; 0.57)) and chronic heart failure (odds ratio?=?0.11, confidence interval (0.01; 0.93)) had significantly lower odds of reporting contact with palliative care specialists and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio?=?0.23, confidence interval (0.08; 0.71)) had significantly lower odds of reporting contact with palliative care nurses. Perceptions of main responsible healthcare professionals or caregivers in patient's care networks varied across countries. Perceived integration was significantly associated with overall satisfaction.Palliative care professionals are not always present or recognised as such in patients' care networks. Expert palliative care involvement needs to be explicated especially for non-cancer patients. One healthcare professional should support patients in understanding and navigating their palliative care network. Patients seem satisfied with care provision as long as continuity of care is provided.

Project description:BackgroundIntegrated knowledge translation (IKT) refers to collaboration between researchers and decision-makers. While advocated as an approach for enhancing the relevance and use of research, IKT is challenging and inconsistently applied. This study sought to inform future IKT practice and research by synthesizing studies that empirically evaluated IKT and identifying knowledge gaps.MethodsWe performed a scoping review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2005 to 2014 for English language studies that evaluated IKT interventions involving researchers and organizational or policy-level decision-makers. Data were extracted on study characteristics, IKT intervention (theory, content, mode, duration, frequency, personnel, participants, timing from initiation, initiator, source of funding, decision-maker involvement), and enablers, barriers, and outcomes reported by studies. We performed content analysis and reported summary statistics.ResultsThirteen studies were eligible after screening 14,754 titles and reviewing 106 full-text studies. Details about IKT activities were poorly reported, and none were formally based on theory. Studies varied in the number and type of interactions between researchers and decision-makers; meetings were the most common format. All studies reported barriers and facilitators. Studies reported a range of positive and sub-optimal outcomes. Outcomes did not appear to be associated with initiator of the partnership, dedicated funding, partnership maturity, nature of decision-maker involvement, presence or absence of enablers or barriers, or the number of different IKT activities.ConclusionsThe IKT strategies that achieve beneficial outcomes remain unknown. We generated a summary of IKT approaches, enablers, barriers, conditions, and outcomes that can serve as the basis for a future review or for planning ongoing primary research. Future research can contribute to three identified knowledge gaps by examining (1) how different IKT strategies influence outcomes, (2) the relationship between the logic or theory underlying IKT interventions and beneficial outcomes, and (3) when and how decision-makers should be involved in the research process. Future IKT initiatives should more systematically plan and document their design and implementation, and evaluations should report the findings with sufficient detail to reveal how IKT was associated with outcomes.

Project description:The importance of linking evidence into practice and policy is recognised as a key pillar of a prudent approach to healthcare; it is of importance to healthcare professionals and decision-makers across the world in every speciality. However, rapid access to evidence to support service redesign, or to change practice at pace, is challenging. This is particularly so in smaller specialties such as Palliative Care, where pressured multidisciplinary clinicians lack time and skill sets to locate and appraise the literature relevant to a particular area. Therefore, we have initiated the Palliative Care Evidence Review Service (PaCERS), a knowledge transfer partnership through which we have developed a clear methodology to conduct evidence reviews to support professionals and other decision-makers working in palliative care.PaCERS methodology utilises modified systematic review methods as there is no agreed definition or an accepted methodology for conducting rapid reviews. This paper describes the stages involved based on our iterative recent experiences and engagement with stakeholders, who are the potential beneficiaries of the research. Uniquely, we emphasise the process and opportunities of engagement with the clinical workforce and policy-makers throughout the review, from developing and refining the review question at the start through to the importance of demonstrating impact. We are faced with the challenge of the trade-off between the timely transfer of evidence against the risk of impacting on rigour. To address this issue, we try to ensure transparency throughout the review process. Our methodology aligns with key principles of knowledge synthesis in defining a process that is transparent, robust and improving the efficiency and timeliness of the review.Our reviews are clinically or policy driven and, although we use modified systematic review methods, one of the key differences between published review processes and our review process is in our relationship with the requester. This streamlining approach to synthesising evidence in a timely manner helps to inform decisions faced by clinicians and decision-makers in healthcare settings, supporting, at pace, knowledge transfer and mobilisation.

Dataset Information

The transfer of knowledge on integrated care among five European regions: a qualitative multi-method study.

Publications

The transfer of knowledge on integrated care among five European regions: a qualitative multi-method study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets