Dataset Information

Developing a patient-oriented realist evaluation for COVID-19 vaccine implementation in Saskatchewan: a methodologic framework

ABSTRACT:

Background:

There is an urgent need to inform decision-making and safe delivery of vaccines in a timely manner. Our objective is to describe the methods we used to perform a patient-oriented realist evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination implementation in Saskatchewan, Canada, in order to understand the underlying mechanisms and contexts of vaccination implementation and vaccine uptake.

Methods:

This methodology paper describes a patient-oriented, realist, mixed-method evaluation to assess COVID-19 vaccination implementation in Regina, Saskatoon and Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. The study comprised 3 iterative phases guided by Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards II (RAMESES II). In phase 1 (January–February 2021), we developed the initial program theory, in phase 2 (March–May 2021), we tested and refined the initial program theory, and in phase 3 (June–July 2021), we established the final program theory. Three patient and family partners with different backgrounds and experiences were selected purposively from various locations (urban and rural) in Saskatchewan to engage collaboratively in the evaluation. Data analysis and synthesis occurred at all 3 phases of the project. We analysed qualitative data from phases 2 and 3 using a “retroductive” approach. We used quantitative data to compare outcomes from the 3 sites.

Interpretation:

This protocol describes how we developed a final program theory for COVID-19 vaccination implementation with patient and family partners to show for whom, under what circumstances, how and why Saskatchewan’s COVID-19 vaccination program has led to vaccine uptake. With patient and family partners’ engagement, the evaluation findings will be shared with the Saskatchewan Health Authority and provincial government policy-makers and communications departments, published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at provincial or national conferences, and disseminated through any additional media identified by the patient and family partners.

SUBMITTER: Azizian A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8612651 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Increasingly, it is being suggested that translational gaps might be eradicated or narrowed by bringing research users and producers closer together, a theory that is largely untested. This paper reports a national study to fill a gap in the evidence about the conditions, processes and outcomes related to collaboration and implementation.A longitudinal realist evaluation using multiple qualitative methods case studies was conducted with three Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research in Care (England). Data were collected over four rounds of theory development, refinement and testing. Over 200 participants were involved in semi-structured interviews, non-participant observations of events and meetings, and stakeholder engagement. A combined inductive and deductive data analysis process was focused on proposition refinement and testing iteratively over data collection rounds.The quality of existing relationships between higher education and local health service, and views about whether implementation was a collaborative act, created a path dependency. Where implementation was perceived to be removed from service and there was a lack of organisational connections, this resulted in a focus on knowledge production and transfer, rather than co-production. The collaborations' architectures were counterproductive because they did not facilitate connectivity and had emphasised professional and epistemic boundaries. More distributed leadership was associated with greater potential for engagement. The creation of boundary spanning roles was the most visible investment in implementation, and credible individuals in these roles resulted in cross-boundary work, in facilitation and in direct impacts. The academic-practice divide played out strongly as a context for motivation to engage, in that 'what's in it for me' resulted in variable levels of engagement along a co-operation-collaboration continuum. Learning within and across collaborations was patchy depending on attention to evaluation.These collaborations did not emerge from a vacuum, and they needed time to learn and develop. Their life cycle started with their position on collaboration, knowledge and implementation. More impactful attempts at collective action in implementation might be determined by the deliberate alignment of a number of features, including foundational relationships, vision, values, structures and processes and views about the nature of the collaboration and implementation.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough disparities in cancer rates, later diagnoses and lower survival rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people have been documented, little is known about how Indigenous patients with cancer encounter the health care system. We explored perceptions and experiences of Indigenous patients with cancer and their families to understand better how 2 key concepts - trust and world view - influence cancer care decisions.MethodsIn this patient-oriented study that included participation of 2 patient partners, qualitative data were collected from Indigenous patients with cancer and their families using an Indigenous method of sharing circles. The sharing circle occurred at a culturally appropriate place, Wanuskewin Heritage Park, Saskatoon, on Sept. 22, 2017. The first patient partner started the sharing circle by sharing their cancer journey, thus engaging the Indigenous methodology of storytelling. This patient partner was involved in selecting the data collection method and recruiting participants through snowballing and social media. Trust and world view were employed as meta themes to guide our examination of the data. In keeping with Indigenous methodology, interview transcripts were analyzed using narrative analysis. The themes were reviewed and verified by a second Indigenous patient partner.ResultsThere were 14 participants in the sharing circle. The 2 meta themes, trust and world view, comprised 8 subthemes. The meta theme trust included mistrust with diagnosis and Western treatment after cancer therapy, protection of Indigenous medicine and physician expertise with treatment recommendations. The world view meta theme included the following subthemes: best of both worlds, spiritual beliefs, required to be strong for family and importance of knowing Indigenous survivors.InterpretationThis study displayed complex relations between trust and world view in the cancer journeys of Indigenous patients and their families. These findings may assist health care providers in gaining a better understanding of how trust and world view affect the decision-making of Indigenous patients regarding cancer care.

Project description:BackgroundTraditional discharge processes lack a patient-centred focus. This project studied the implementation and effectiveness of an individualized discharge tool across Ontario hospitals. The Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) is an individualized discharge tool with guidelines that was co-designed with patients and families to enable a patient-centred process.MethodsTwenty one acute-care and rehabilitation hospitals in Ontario, Canada engaged in a community of practice and worked over a period of 18 months to implement PODS. An effectiveness-implementation hybrid design using a triangulation approach was used with hospital-collected data, patient and provider surveys, and interviews of project teams. Key outcomes included: penetration and fidelity of the intervention, change in patient-centred processes, patient and provider satisfaction and experience, and healthcare utilization. Statistical methods included linear mixed effects models and generalized estimating equations.ResultsOf 65,221 discharges across hospitals, 41,884 patients (64%) received a PODS. There was variation in reach and implementation pattern between sites, though none of the between site covariates was significantly associated with implementation success. Both high participation in the community of practice and high fidelity were associated with higher penetration. PODS improved family involvement during discharge teaching (7% increase, p = 0.026), use of teach-back (11% increase, p < 0.001) and discussion of help needed (6% increase, p = 0.041). Although unscheduled healthcare utilization decreased with PODS implementation, it was not statistically significant.ConclusionsThis project highlighted the system-wide adaptability and ease of implementing PODS across multiple patient groups and hospital settings. PODS demonstrated an improvement in patient-centred discharge processes linked to quality standards and health outcomes. A community of practice and high quality content may be needed for successful implementation.

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop a standardised set of economic parameters (core economic parameter set) for economic evaluations in asthma studies.DesignA systematic literature review and an analytical framework.Outcome measuresEconomic parameters used to evaluate costs and cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions for people with asthma.Data sourcesPubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Aaaessment Library starting from 1990.Review methodsResearch methods were based on the realist review methodology and included a number of non-sequential, iterative and overlapping components, such as developing an analytical framework for the realist review; systematic literature review of economic parameters; identifying and categorising economic parameters; producing preliminary list of core economic parameters.ResultsDatabase searches found 2531 publications of which 224 were included in the systematic review. We identified 65 economic parameters that were categorised into 11 groups to enable the realist synthesis. Parameters related to secondary care, primary care, medication use, emergency care and work productivity comprised 84% of all economic parameters. An analytical framework was used to investigate the rationale behind the choices of economic parameters in these studies. The main framework domains included type of intervention, research population, study design, study setting and a stakeholder's perspective.ConclusionPast research thus suggests that in asthma study parameters depicting the use of secondary care, primary care, medication, emergency care and work productivity can be considered as core economic parameters, since they apply to different types of studies. Parameters including diagnostics, healthcare delivery, school activity, informal care, medical devices and health utility apply to a particular type of study (or research question), and thus can be recommended as supplemental parameters.Prospero registration numberCRD42017067867.

Project description:PurposeMany patients living with bladder cancer do not undergo surveillance that is aligned with their risk for recurrence or progression, which exposes them to unnecessary risk and burden of procedures. To implement risk-aligned surveillance as recommended by multiple guidelines, we need to understand patient-, provider-, and system-level factors contributing to the delivery of risk-aligned surveillance. In this study, we sought to systematically assess patient-level factors.Participants and methodsGuided by the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework, we conducted semistructured interviews with 22 patients with bladder cancer undergoing surveillance cystoscopy procedures at three facilities within the Department of Veterans Affairs. Patients were sampled using quantitative data on bladder cancer risk category (low v high) and on surveillance category (aligned v not aligned with cancer risk). Interview transcripts were analyzed using a priori codes from the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated by cross-tabulating determinants across risk and surveillance categories.ResultsParticipants included seven low-risk and 15 high-risk patients; 10 underwent risk-aligned surveillance and 12 did not. In mixed-methods analyses, perception of risk appropriately differed by risk but not by surveillance category. Participants understood the recommended surveillance schedule according to their risk category. Participants emphatically expressed that adhering to providers' recommendations is prudent; intentions to adhere did not vary across risk and surveillance categories.ConclusionParticipants intended to adhere to providers' recommendations and strongly endorsed the importance of adherence. These findings suggest implementation strategies to improve risk-aligned surveillance may be most effective when targeting provider- and system-level factors rather than patient-level factors.