Dataset Information

Shifting care from hospital to community, a strategy to integrate care in Singapore: process evaluation of implementation fidelity.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Accessibility to efficient and person-centered healthcare delivery drives healthcare transformation in many countries. In Singapore, specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) are commonly congested due to increasing demands for chronic care. To improve this situation, the National University Health System (NUHS) Regional Health System (RHS) started an integrated care initiative,the Right-Site Care (RSC) program in 2014. Through collaborations between SOCs at the National University Hospital and primary and community care (PCC) clinics in the western region of the county, the program was designed to facilitate timely discharge and appropriate transition of patients, who no longer required specialist care, to the community. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation fidelity of the NUHS RHS RSC program using the modified Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity (CFIF), at three distinct levels; providers, organizational, and system levels to explain outcomes of the program and to inform further development of (similar) programs. METHODS:A convergent parallel mixed methods study using the realist evaluation approach was used. Data were collected between 2016 and 2018 through non-participatory observations, reviews of medical records and program database, together with semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. Triangulation of data streams was applied guided by the modified CFIF. RESULTS:Our findings showed four out of six program components were implemented with low level of fidelity, and 9112 suitable patients were referred to the program while 3032 (33.3%) declined to be enrolled. Moderating factors found to influence fidelity included: (i) complexity of program, (ii) evolving providers' responsiveness, (iii) facilitation through synergistic partnership, training of PCC providers by specialists and supportive structures: care coordinators, guiding protocols, shared electronic medical record and shared pharmacy, (iv) lack of organization reinforcement, and (v) mismatch between program goals, healthcare financing and providers' reimbursement. CONCLUSION:Functional integration alone is insufficient for a successful right-site care program implementation. Improvement in relationships between providers, organizations, and patients are also warranted for further development of the program.

SUBMITTER: Nurjono M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7245814 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Shifting care from hospital to community, a strategy to integrate care in Singapore: process evaluation of implementation fidelity.

Nurjono Milawaty M Shrestha Pami P Ang Ian Yi Han IYH Shiraz Farah F Eh Ke Xin KX Toh Sue-Anne Ee Shiow SES Vrijhoef Hubertus Johannes Maria HJM

BMC health services research 20200524 1

<h4>Background</h4>Accessibility to efficient and person-centered healthcare delivery drives healthcare transformation in many countries. In Singapore, specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) are commonly congested due to increasing demands for chronic care. To improve this situation, the National University Health System (NUHS) Regional Health System (RHS) started an integrated care initiative,the Right-Site Care (RSC) program in 2014. Through collaborations between SOCs at the National University ...[more]

PMID: 32448283

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:To cope with rising demand for healthcare services in Singapore, Regional Health Systems (RHS) comprising of health and social care providers across care settings were set up to integrate service delivery. Tasked with providing care for the western region, in 2012, the National University Health System (NUHS) - RHS developed a transitional care program for elderly patients with complex healthcare needs who consumed high levels of hospital resources. Through needs assessment, development of personalized care plans and care coordination, the program aimed to: (i) improve quality of care, (ii) reduce hospital utilization, and (iii) reduce healthcare-related costs. In this study, recognizing the need for process evaluation in conjunction with outcome evaluation, we aim to evaluate the implementation fidelity of the NUHS-RHS transitional care program to explain the outcomes of the program and to inform further development of (similar) programs. METHODS:Guided by the modified version of the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity (CFIF), adherence and moderating factors influencing implementation were assessed using non-participatory observations, reviews of medical records and program databases. RESULTS:Most (10 out of 14) components of the program were found to be implemented with low or moderate level of fidelity. The frequency or duration of the program components were observed to vary based on the needs of users, availability of care coordinators (CC) and their confidence. Variation in fidelity was influenced predominantly by: (1) complexity of the program, (2) extent of facilitation through guiding protocols, (3) facilitation of program implementation through CCs' level of training and confidence, (4) evolving healthcare participant responsiveness, and (5) the context of suboptimal capability among community providers. CONCLUSION:This is the first study to assess the context-specific implementation process of a transitional care program in the context of Southeast Asia. It provides important insights to facilitate further development and scaling up of transitional care programs within the NUHS-RHS and beyond. Our findings highlight the need for greater focus on engaging both healthcare providers and users, training CCs to equip them with the relevant skills required for their jobs, and building the capability of the community providers to implement such programs.

Project description:BackgroundHospital to community pharmacy transfer of care medicines-related interventions for inpatients discharged home aim to improve continuity of care and patient outcomes. One such intervention has been provided for seven years within a region in England. This study reports upon the implementation process and fidelity of this intervention.MethodsThe process evaluation guidance issued by the Medical Research Council has informed this study. A logic model to describe the intervention and causal assumptions was developed from preliminary semi-structured interviews with project team members. Further semi-structured interviews were undertaken with intervention providers from hospital and community pharmacy, and with patient and public representatives. These aimed to investigate intervention implementation process and fidelity. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Consolidated Framework for Intervention Fidelity informed interview topic guides and underpinned the thematic framework analysis using a combined inductive and deductive approach.ResultsThemes provided information about intervention fidelity and implementation that were mapped across the sub processes of implementation: planning, execution, reflection and evaluation, and engagement. Interviewees described factors such as lack of training, awareness, clarity on the service specification, governance and monitoring and information and feedback which caused significant issues with the process of intervention implementation and suboptimal intervention fidelity.ConclusionsThis provides in-depth insight into the implementation process and fidelity of a ToC intervention, and the extant barriers and facilitators. The findings offer learning to inform the design and implementation of similar interventions, contribute to the evidence base about barriers and facilitators to such interventions and provides in-depth description of the implementation and mechanisms of impact which have the potential to influence clinical and economic outcome evaluation.

Project description:Background Implementation of clinical medication reviews in daily practice is scarcely evaluated. The Opti-Med intervention applied a structured approach with external expert teams (pharmacist and physician) to conduct medication reviews. The intervention was effective with respect to resolving drug related problems, but did not improve quality of life. Objective The objective of this process evaluation was to gain more insight into the implementation fidelity of the intervention. Setting Process evaluation alongside a cluster randomized trial in 22 general practices and 518 patients of 65 years and over. Method A mixed methods design using quantitative and qualitative data and the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity was used. Implementation fidelity is defined as the degree to which the various components of an intervention are delivered as intended. Main outcome measure Implementation fidelity for key components of the Opti-Med intervention. Results Patient selection and preparation of the medication analyses were carried out as planned, although mostly by the Opti-Med researchers instead of practice nurses. Medication analyses by expert teams were performed as planned, as well as patient consultations and patient involvement. 48% of the proposed changes in the medication regime were implemented. Cooperation between expert teams members and the use of an online decision-support medication evaluation facilitated implementation. Barriers for implementation were time constraints in daily practice, software difficulties with patient selection and incompleteness of medical files. The degree of embedding of the intervention was found to influence implementation fidelity. The total time investment for healthcare professionals was 94 min per patient. Conclusion Overall, the implementation fidelity was moderate to high for all key components of the Opti-Med intervention. The absence of its effectiveness with respect to quality of life could not be explained by insufficient implementation fidelity.

Project description:Community-based newborn care (CBNC) has been implemented in Ethiopia across the maternal, neonatal, and child health continuum of care with the goal of lowering newborn mortality. However, neonatal mortality rate in Ethiopian is among the highest in the world. Why neonatal mortality remains high in the face of such effective interventions is the issue. As a result, the authors claim that it is unknown whether the planned intervention is carried out effectively or not. The purpose of this study was to investigate the fidelity of community-based newborn care intervention and its implementation drivers. Multicenter community-based mixed method study was employed on 898 postpartum women, 16 health extension workers (HEWs) and 10 health posts to evaluate CBNC intervention fidelity. Structured questionnaire and facility audit checklist was used to collect quantitative data. In-depth interview technique was used to explore lived experiences of HEWs on CBNC implementation. CBNC intervention fidelity was computed as a composite index of the product of program coverage, frequency and contents. Multilevel linear regression model with adjusted β-coefficients at P-value of 0.05 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to declare a significant relation between CBNC intervention fidelity and its implementation drivers. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was employed for qualitative data analysis. CBNC intervention fidelity was found to be 4.5% (95% CI: 3.6-5.4) with only two women received the intervention with full fidelity. The overall CBNC intervention coverage was 38.4% (95% CI: 35.2-41.6). Only 8.1% and 1.5% of women received all CBNC interventions with recommended frequency and content, respectively. HEWs knowledge of danger sign was significant facilitator while lack of: health center's feedback, related short-term training, health development army support, health center staff's technical assistance to HEWs and shortage of medical equipment supply were barriers for CBNC intervention fidelity. In conclusion the CBNC intervention fidelity was too low in this study. This indicates that CBNC intervention package was not implemented as envisioned implying an implementation gap. All implementation drivers were poorly implemented to result in improved fidelity and intervention outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundBlunt chest wall injuries can lead to complications, especially without early intervention. A blunt Chest Injury Protocol (ChIP) was developed to help improve the consistency of evidence-based care following admission to the emergency department. Implementation strategy fidelity is the extent to which the strategies of implementation are delivered in line with the intended plan. The aim of this study was to assess fidelity to the strategies of the implementation plan developed for ChIP.MethodsA retrospective evaluation of strategies used for implementation was performed, specifically the behaviour change techniques (BCTs). BCTs were used as part of an implementation plan derived based on the Behaviour Change Wheel from results from a staff survey at two hospitals. Levels of implementation or adaptation for BCTs were scored by implementers as follows: 'Were the behaviour change interventions implemented?' (0 = 'not implemented', 1 = partially implemented, and 2 = fully implemented); 'Were adaptations made to the implementation plan?', scored 1 (many changes from plan) to 4 (just as planned). Free text explanation to their responses was also collected with supporting evidence and documentation (such as emails, implementation checklists, audit reports, and incident reports).ResultsThere was high overall fidelity of 97.6% for BCTs partially or fully implemented. More than three quarters (32/42, 76.2%) of the BCTs were fully implemented with an additional 9/42 (21.4%) partially implemented. BCTs that were not fully implemented were social support, feedback on behaviour, feedback on outcomes of behaviour, adding objects to the environment, and restructuring the environment. The modes of delivery with poorer implementation or increased adaptations were clinical champions and audit/feedback.ConclusionsThis study describes the evaluation of implementation strategy fidelity in the acute care context. The systematic use and application of the behaviour change wheel was used to develop an implementation plan and was associated with high implementation strategy fidelity. A fidelity checklist developed during the implementation process may help implementers assess fidelity.Trial registrationTrial registered on ANZCTR. Registration number ACTRN12618001548224 , date approved 17/09/2018.

Project description:IntroductionHospital-based practices today remain predominantly disease-oriented, focusing on individual clinical specialties with less visibility on a comprehensive picture of each patient's health needs. To tackle the challenge of growing multimorbidity worldwide, practices without disease-specific focus have shown better integration of services. However, as we move away from the familiar disease-specific approaches of care delivery, many of us are still learning how to implement generalist care in a cost-effective manner.MethodsThis mixed-method case study, which centred on a specialist-led General Medicine model implemented at an acute hospital in Singapore, aimed to (1) quantitatively summarise its clinical outcomes, and (2) qualitatively describe the challenges and lessons gathered from the pragmatic implementation of the care model. Quantitative hospital data were extracted from databases and summarised. Qualitative staff-reported experiences and insights were gathered through semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsQuantitative findings revealed that the generalist care model was implemented with high fidelity, where more than 75% of patients admitted were placed under General Medicine's or General Surgery's care. The mean length of stay was 2.6 days, and the 30-day post-discharge readmission rate was 15%. Inpatient mortality rate was found to be 2.8%, and the average gross hospitalisation bill amounted to SGD3,085.30. For qualitative findings, themes concerning feasibility and operational aspects of the implementation were grouped into categories- (1) Feasibility of 'One Care Team' approach, (2) Enablers required for meaningful generalist care, (3) Challenges surrounding information sharing, (4) Lack of integration with the community to facilitate care transition, and (5) Evolving roles of self-management. The findings were rich, with some being identified as barriers that could benefit from system-level de-constraining.DiscussionThis case study was an illustration of our pursuit for an integrated solution to rising prevalence of multimorbidity. While quantitative findings indicated that a pivot towards General Medicine might be possible, data also revealed gaps in clinical outcomes, especially in readmission rates. These findings corroborated with much of the lessons and challenges gathered from qualitative interviews, specifically surrounding the lack of receptacles in the community to facilitate care transition, training, and competency of generalists in holistic management of complex multimorbid cases, as well as inadequate infrastructure to allow information sharing between providers. Thus, a multi-pronged approach might be required to develop a new and sustainable care model for patients with multimorbidity in the long run. In the short to medium transitional period, nonetheless, the specialist-led General Medicine care model demonstrated might be a viable interim approach, especially in circumstances where trained medical generalists remained limited.

Project description:Background"We Act" is a health-promoting school intervention comprising an educational, a parental and a school component. The intervention was implemented in 4 Danish public schools with 4 control schools. The objectives were to improve pupils' dietary habits, physical activity, well-being and social capital using the Investigation, Vision, Action & Change (IVAC) health educational methodology. The target group was pupils in grades 5-6. The purpose of this study was to evaluate implementation fidelity and interacting context factors in the intervention schools.MethodsThe Medical Research Council's new guidance for process evaluation was used as a framework. Data were collected concurrently and evenly at the 4 intervention schools through field visits (n?=?43?days), questionnaires (n?=?17 teachers, 52 parents), and interviews (n?=?9 teachers, 4 principals, 52 pupils). The data were analysed separately and via triangulation.ResultsA total of 289 pupils participated, and 22 teachers delivered the educational component in 12 classes. In all schools, the implementation fidelity to the educational methodology was high for the Investigation and Vision phases as the teachers delivered the proposed lessons and activities. However, the implementation fidelity to the Action & Change phase was low, and little change occurred in the schools. The pupils' presentation of their visions did not work as intended as an impact mechanism to prompt actions. The implementation of the parental and the school components was weak. The main context factors influencing implementation fidelity were a poor fit into the school-year plan and weak management support.ConclusionsAlthough 'We Act' was designed to comply with evidence- and theory-based requirements, IVAC and the health-promoting school approach did not result in change. The time dedicated to schools' preparation and competence development may have been too low. This must be considered in future process evaluation research on health-promoting schools and by school health promotion administrators when planning future school interventions.Trial registrationISRCTN85203017.

Project description:BackgroundAssessing the fidelity of an implementation strategy is important to understand why and how the strategy influences the uptake of evidence-based interventions. The present study aims to assess the fidelity of the two procedures for engaging primary care (PC) professionals and for the deployment of an implementation strategy for optimizing type 2 diabetes prevention in routine PC within the PREDIAPS randomized cluster implementation trial.MethodWe conducted a mixed-method fidelity evaluation study of the PVS-PREDIAPS implementation strategy. Nine PC centers from the Basque Health Service (Osakidetza) were allocated to two different procedures to engage physicians and nurses and deploy a implementation strategy to model and adapt the clinical intervention and its implementation to their specific contexts: a Global procedure, promoting the cooperation of all healthcare professionals from the beginning; or a Sequential procedure, centered first on nurses who then pursued the pragmatic cooperation of physicians. Process indicators of the delivery and receipt of implementation strategy actions, documented modifications to the planned implementation strategy, and a structured group interview with centers' leaders were all used to assess the following components of fidelity: adherence, dose, quality of delivery, professionals' responsiveness and program differentiation.ResultsGenerally, the procedures compared for professionals engagement and deployment of the implementation strategy were carried out with the planned differentiation. Nonetheless, some unexpected between-group differences were observed, the initial rate of collaboration of nurses being higher in the Sequential (93%) than in the Global (67%) groups. Exposure rate to the programed implementation actions (% of hours received out of those delivered) were similar in both groups by professional category, with nurses (86%) having a higher rate of exposure than physicians (75%). Professionals identified half of the planned discrete strategies and their rating of strategies' perceived usefulness was overwhelmingly positive, with few differences between Sequential and Global centers.ConclusionsThe PVS-PREDIAPS implementation strategy has been implemented with high fidelity and minor unplanned reactive modifications. Professionals' exposure to the implementation strategy was high in both groups. The centers' organizational context (i.e., work overload) led to small mismatches between groups in participation and exposure of professionals to implementation actions.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03254979 . Registered 16 August 2017.

Dataset Information

Shifting care from hospital to community, a strategy to integrate care in Singapore: process evaluation of implementation fidelity.

Publications

Shifting care from hospital to community, a strategy to integrate care in Singapore: process evaluation of implementation fidelity.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets