Dataset Information

How to Implement Digital Services in a Way That They Integrate Into Routine Work: Qualitative Interview Study Among Health and Social Care Professionals.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly boosted the implementation of digital services worldwide, it has become increasingly important to understand how these solutions are integrated into professionals' routine work. Professionals who are using the services are key influencers in the success of implementations. To ensure successful implementations, it is important to understand the multiprofessional perspective, especially because implementations are likely to increase even more.

Objective

The aim of this study is to examine health and social care professionals' experiences of digital service implementations and to identify factors that support successful implementations and should be considered in the future to ensure that the services are integrated into professionals' routine work.

Methods

A qualitative approach was used, in which 8 focus group interviews were conducted with 30 health and social care professionals from 4 different health centers in Finland. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The resulting categories were organized under the components of normalization process theory.

Results

Our results suggested 14 practices that should be considered when implementing new digital services into routine work. To get professionals to understand and make sense of the new service, (1) the communication related to the implementation should be comprehensive and continuous and (2) the implementation process should be consistent. (3) A justification for the service being implemented should also be given. The best way to engage the professionals with the service is (4) to give them opportunities to influence and (5) to make sure that they have a positive attitude toward the service. To enact the new service into professionals' routine work, it is important that (6) the organization take a supportive approach by providing support from several easy and efficient sources. The professionals should also have (7) enough time to become familiar with the service, and they should have (8) enough know-how about the service. The training should be (9) targeted individually according to skills and work tasks, and (10) it should be diverse. The impact of the implementation on the professionals' work should be evaluated. The service (11) should be easy to use, and (12) usage monitoring should happen. An opportunity (13) to give feedback on the service should also be offered. Moreover, (14) the service should support professionals' work tasks.

Conclusions

We introduce 14 practices for organizations and service providers on how to ensure sustainable implementation of new digital services and the smooth integration into routine work. It is important to pay more attention to comprehensive and continuing communication. Organizations should conduct a competence assessment before training in order to ensure proper alignment. Follow-ups to the implementation process should be performed to guarantee sustainability of the service. Our findings from a forerunner country of digitalization can be useful for countries that are beginning their service digitalization or further developing their digital services.

SUBMITTER: Nadav J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8686404 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDigital mental health interventions (DMHIs) represent a promising solution to address the growing unmet mental health needs and increase access to care. Integrating DMHIs into clinical and community settings is challenging and complex. Frameworks that explore a wide range of factors, such as the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework, can be useful for examining multilevel factors related to DMHI implementation efforts.ObjectiveThis paper aimed to identify the barriers to, facilitators of, and best practice recommendations for implementing DMHIs across similar organizational settings, according to the EPIS domains of inner context, outer context, innovation factors, and bridging factors.MethodsThis study stems from a large state-funded project in which 6 county behavioral health departments in California explored the use of DMHIs as part of county mental health services. Our team conducted interviews with clinical staff, peer support specialists, county leaders, project leaders, and clinic leaders using a semistructured interview guide. The development of the semistructured interview guide was informed by expert input regarding relevant inner context, outer context, innovation factors, and bridging factors in the exploration, preparation, and implementation phases of the EPIS framework. We followed a recursive 6-step process to conduct qualitative analyses using inductive and deductive components guided by the EPIS framework.ResultsOn the basis of 69 interviews, we identified 3 main themes that aligned with the EPIS framework: readiness of individuals, readiness of innovations, and readiness of organizations and systems. Individual-level readiness referred to the extent to which clients had the necessary technological tools (eg, smartphones) and knowledge (digital literacy) to support the DMHI. Innovation-level readiness pertained to the accessibility, usefulness, safety, and fit of the DMHI. Organization- and system-level readiness concerned the extent to which providers and leadership collectively held positive views about DMHIs as well as the extent to which infrastructure (eg, staffing and payment model) was appropriate.ConclusionsThe successful implementation of DMHIs requires readiness at the individual, innovation, and organization and system levels. To improve individual-level readiness, we recommend equitable device distribution and digital literacy training. To improve innovation readiness, we recommend making DMHIs easier to use and introduce, clinically useful, and safe and adapting them to fit into the existing client needs and clinical workflow. To improve organization- and system-level readiness, we recommend supporting providers and local behavioral health departments with adequate technology and training and exploring potential system transformations (eg, integrated care model). Conceptualizing DMHIs as services allows the consideration of both the innovation characteristics of DMHIs (eg, efficacy, safety, and clinical usefulness) and the ecosystem around DMHIs, such as individual and organizational characteristics (inner context), purveyors and intermediaries (bridging factor), client characteristics (outer context), as well as the fit between the innovation and implementation settings (innovation factor).

Project description:BackgroundAccess to integrated services for individuals with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders is a long-standing public health issue. Receiving integrated treatment services are both more effective and preferred by patients and families versus parallel or fragmented care. National policy statements and expert consensus guidelines underscore the benefits of integrated treatment. Despite decades of awareness, adequate treatment for individuals with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders occurs infrequently. The underlying disease burden associated with alcohol, illicit and prescription drug problems, as well as mental health disorders, such as depression, posttraumatic stress disorder and schizophrenia, is substantial.MethodsThis cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) is designed to determine if the multi-component Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment (NIATx) strategies are effective in implementing integrated services for persons with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders. In this study, 50 behavioral health programs in Washington State will be recruited and then randomized into one of two intervention arms: 1) NIATx implementation strategies, including coaching and learning sessions over a 12-month intervention period to implement changes targeting integrated treatment services; or 2) wait-list control. Primary outcome measures include: 1) fidelity - a standardized organizational assessment of integrated services (Dual Diagnosis in Addiction Treatment [DDCAT] Index); and 2) penetration - proportion of patients screened and diagnosed with co-occurring disorders, proportion of eligible patients receiving substance use and mental health services, and psychotropic or substance use disorder medications. Barriers and facilitators, as determinants of implementation outcomes, will be assessed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) Index. Fidelity to and participation in NIATx strategies will be assessed utilizing the NIATx Fidelity Scale and Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC).DiscussionThis study addresses an issue of substantial public health significance: the gap in access to an evidence-based practice for integrated treatment for individuals with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. The study utilizes rigorous and reproducible quantitative approaches to measuring implementation determinants and strategies, and may address a longstanding gap in the quality of care for persons with co-occurring disorders.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03007940 . Registered 02 January 2017 - Retrospectively Registered.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Implementing digital technology in home care services challenges care arrangements built on face-to-face encounters. Digital welfare technology has been suggested as a solution to increasing demands on health care services from an ageing population. Medication delivery is a major task for home care services, and digital medication devices could lessen the need for resources. But technology has scripts based on how designers picture its use, and these might not fit with users' needs and practices. New technology must go through processes of domestication among its users. In the present study, we investigate how health professionals experienced the implementation of a digital medication dispenser into home care services in Norway. METHODS:This was a qualitative interview study with 26 health professionals from home care services in five municipalities. RESULTS:All five municipalities had implemented a digital medication dispenser in home care services. Prior to the introduction of the dispenser, medication practices had been based on home visits. The safety of medication practices was the main concern of health professionals who had to negotiate the technological script in order to make it work in a new care arrangement. Rationalities of effectiveness collided with rationalities of care, symbolized by warm hands. Professionals who had been used to working independently became dependent on technical support. Being unfamiliar with the new medication arrangement led to resistance towards the digital dispenser, but more direct experiences changed the focus from technology to new care arrangements. Negotiating practical and organizational arrangements led health professionals to trust the digital medication dispenser to contribute to safe and good care for service users. CONCLUSIONS:Implementing digital technology in home care services must be informed by previous practices in the field, especially when it concerns safety for patients. Through processes of domestication, health professionals negotiate technological scripts to make them fit professional ideals and practices. Policymakers and managers must address questions of care arrangements and individualized adaptions to patients' needs in order to receive support from health professionals when implementing digital technology in home care services.

Project description:BackgroundIntegration of genetic testing into routine oncology care could improve access to testing. This systematic review investigated interventions and the tailored implementation strategies aimed at increasing access to genetic counselling and testing and identifying hereditary cancer in oncology.MethodsThe search strategy results were reported using the PRISMA statement and four electronic databases were searched. Eligible studies included routine genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer or uptake after universal tumour screening for colorectal or endometrial cancer. The titles and abstracts were reviewed and the full text articles screened for eligibility. Data extraction was preformed using a designed template and study appraisal was assessed using an adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Extracted data were mapped to Proctor's et al outcomes and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and qualitatively synthesised.ResultsTwenty-seven studies, published up to May 2020, met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies ranged from poor (72%), fair to good (28%) quality. Most interventions identified were complex (multiple components) such as; patient or health professional education, interdisciplinary practice and a documentation or system change. Forty-eight percent of studies with complex interventions demonstrated on average a 35% increase in access to genetic counselling and a 15% increase in testing completion. Mapping of study outcomes showed that 70% and 32% of the studies aligned with either the service and client or the implementation level outcome and 96% to the process or inner setting domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.ConclusionExisting evidence suggests that complex interventions have a potentially positive effect towards genetic counselling and testing completion rates in oncology services. Studies of sound methodological quality that explore a greater breadth of pre and post implementation outcomes and informed by theory are needed. Such research could inform future service delivery models for the integration of genetics into oncology services.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in third sector organisations (TSOs) delivering health and well-being services.DesignA qualitative interview study. Participants were recruited using purposive, opportunistic and snowballing methods. Framework analysis was used.SettingTSOs including charities, community groups and not-for-profit organisations in England, UK.ParticipantsThirty interviewees including service users, TSO front-line workers and managers, commissioners of TSOs and other stakeholders such as academic researchers.ResultsTSOs primarily used PROMs because of pressures arising from the external funding context. However, organisations often struggled to implement PROMs, rarely getting the process right first time. Facilitators for implementation included having an implementation lead committed to making it work, investing resources in data management systems and support staff and taking a collaborative approach to designing the PROMs process. The latter helped to ensure an appropriate PROMs process for the specific TSO including choosing a suitable measure and planning how data would be collected, processed and used. There was a dilemma about whether TSOs should use standardised well-being measures (eg, the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) or design their own PROM. Not all TSOs sustained the collection and reporting of PROMs over time because this required a change in organisational culture to view PROMs as beneficial for the TSO and PROMs becoming part of front-line workers' job specifications.ConclusionsTSOs are trying to use PROMs because they feel they have no choice but often struggle with implementation. Having an implementation lead, designing an appropriate process, investing resources, training staff and taking mitigating action to address potential barriers can facilitate implementation. Some of the findings are consistent with the experiences of more clinical services so appear relevant to the implementation of PROMs irrespective of the specific context.

Project description:BackgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome is a common nerve compression disorder which affects hand sensation and function. Carpal tunnel release surgery (CTR) is frequently performed to alleviate these symptoms. For many CTR patients, surgery occurs during their working lifetime, but there is currently no evidence-based guidance to inform clinicians or patients when it might be safe to return to different types of work afterwards. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the return to work experiences of patients who had recently undergone CTR.MethodsSemi-structured 1:1 interviews were conducted with a subgroup of participants recruited to a multi-centre prospective cohort study. Interviewees were purposely selected to represent a range of demographic, clinical and occupational characteristics. All had recently undergone CTR and had returned to work. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the framework method. Participants were recruited until data saturation was achieved.ResultsFourteen participants were interviewed: 11 women (median age 49 years, range 27-61) and 3 men (age range 51-68 years). Three key themes were identified. Theme 1 centred on the level of functional disability experienced immediately after surgery. There was an expectation that CTR would be a 'minor' procedure, but this did not match the participants' experiences. Theme 2 explored the desire for validation for the time away from work, with participants recalling a need to justify their work absence to themselves as well as to their employers. Theme 3 focused on the participants' reflections of handing their return to work and function, with many reporting uncertainties about what constituted appropriate activity loads and durations. There was a desire for specific information relating to individual work roles.ConclusionIndividual return to work decision-making was largely influenced by the recommendations received. According to the views of participants, clinicians may be able to prepare patients better pre-operatively, especially with respect to function in the immediate post-operative period and by providing return to work guidance that can be tailored for individual work roles.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral international studies suggest that the feedback that emergency ambulance service (EMS) personnel receive on the care they have delivered lacks structure, relevance, credibility and routine implementation. Feedback in this context can relate to performance or patient outcomes, can come from a variety of sources and can be sought or imposed. Evidence from health services research and implementation science, suggests that feedback can change professional behavior, improve clinical outcomes and positively influence staff mental health. The current study aimed to explore the experience of EMS professionals regarding current feedback provision and their views on how feedback impacts on patient care, patient safety and staff wellbeing.MethodsThis qualitative study was conducted as part of a wider study of work-related wellbeing in EMS professionals. We used purposive sampling to select 24 frontline EMS professionals from one ambulance service in the United Kingdom and conducted semi-structured interviews. The data was analyzed in iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning using Abductive Thematic Network Analysis. The analysis was informed by psychological theory, as well as models from the wider feedback effectiveness and feedback-seeking behavior literature.ResultsParticipants viewed current feedback provision as inadequate and consistently expressed a desire for increased feedback. Reported types of prehospital feedback included patient outcome feedback, patient-experience feedback, peer-to-peer feedback, performance feedback, feedforward: on-scene advice, debriefing and investigations and coroners' reports. Participants raised concerns that inadequate feedback could negatively impact on patient safety by preventing learning from mistakes. Enhancing feedback provision was thought to improve patient care and staff wellbeing by supporting personal and professional development.ConclusionsIn line with previous research in this area, this study highlights EMS professionals' strong desire for feedback. The study advances the literature by suggesting a typology of prehospital feedback and presenting a unique insight into the motives for feedback-seeking using psychological theory. A logic model for prehospital feedback interventions was developed to inform future research and development into prehospital feedback.

Project description:Aims and objectivesThis study aims to provide insight into healthcare professionals' lived experiences of digital health competence with the objective of improving the knowledge of how digital health competence is perceived by healthcare professionals.BackgroundHealthcare professionals need to adjust to the digital era to provide quality and ethical care. Previous research has rarely adopted a healthcare professional's standpoint to describe their perceptions of digital health competence, even though their perspective in how new care practices are designed and implemented is vital.DesignA qualitative descriptive study.MethodsHealthcare professionals (nurses and allied health professionals) from versatile healthcare settings were recruited for individual semi-structured interviews in Sweden (n = 5) and Finland (n = 15) (spring 2019-summer 2020). Purposive and convenience sampling was used. Participants' backgrounds were in the public and private sectors. The interviews were transcribed for inductive content analysis. The SRQR guideline guided the study process.ResultsHealthcare professionals' perceptions of digital health competence are connected to competence to provide patient-centric care through digital channels, using technology and digital health systems, interacting with the patient through digital means, evaluating what digital health is and combining digital and traditional methods. Professionals' perceptions of their own digital health competence were divided, with the participants either reporting sufficient competence or perceiving a lack of skills in some specific areas.ConclusionsHealthcare professionals' perceptions of digital health competence focus on the ability to provide patient-centric care by evaluating the need and possibilities for using digital health services jointly with more traditional methods. This study provides a sound basis for digital health research, but future studies should focus on elucidating factors which affect digital health competence and competence development.Relevance to clinical practiceThe results of this study can guide healthcare practices and digital health implementation, as well as function as a basis for instrument or theory development. Health care and nursing leaders should enable the resources to hybrid practices in patient-centric care provision.