Dataset Information

Mixed-methods evaluation of the Perioperative Medicine Service for High-Risk Patients Implementation Pilot (POMSHIP): a study protocol.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Perioperative complications have a lasting effect on health-related quality of life and long-term survival. The Royal College of Anaesthetists has proposed the development of perioperative medicine (POM) services as an intervention aimed at improving postoperative outcome, by providing better coordinated care for high-risk patients. The Perioperative Medicine Service for High-risk Patients Implementation Pilot was developed to determine if a specialist POM service is able to reduce postoperative morbidity, failure to rescue, mortality and cost associated with hospital admission. The service involves individualised objective risk assessment, admission to a postoperative critical care unit and follow-up on the surgical ward by the POM team. This paper introduces the service and how it will be evaluated. METHODS AND ANALYSIS OF THE EVALUATION:A mixed-methods evaluation is exploring the impact of the service. Clinical effectiveness of the service is being analysed using a 'before and after' comparison of the primary outcome (the PostOperative Morbidity Score). Secondary outcomes will include length of stay, validated surveys to explore quality of life (EQ-5D) and quality of recovery (Quality of Recovery-15 Score). The impact on costs is being analysed using 'before and after' data from the Patient-Level Information and Costing System and the National Schedule of Reference Costs. The perceptions and experiences of staff and patients with the service, and how it is being implemented, are being explored by a qualitative process evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study was classified as a service evaluation. Participant information sheets and consent forms have been developed for the interviews and approvals required for the use of the validated surveys were obtained. The findings of the evaluation are being used formatively, to make changes in the service throughout implementation. The findings will also be used to inform the potential roll-out of the service to other sites.

SUBMITTER: Walker D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6196867 | biostudies-other | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mixed-methods evaluation of the Perioperative Medicine Service for High-Risk Patients Implementation Pilot (POMSHIP): a study protocol.

Walker David D Wagstaff Duncan D McGuckin Dermot D Vindrola-Padros Cecilia C Swart Nicholas N Morris Stephen S Crowe Sonya S Fulop Naomi J NJ Moonesinghe S Ramani SR

BMJ open 20181021 10

<h4>Introduction</h4>Perioperative complications have a lasting effect on health-related quality of life and long-term survival. The Royal College of Anaesthetists has proposed the development of perioperative medicine (POM) services as an intervention aimed at improving postoperative outcome, by providing better coordinated care for high-risk patients. The Perioperative Medicine Service for High-risk Patients Implementation Pilot was developed to determine if a specialist POM service is able to ...[more]

PMID: 30344168

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe African Federation for Emergency Medicine Trauma Data Project (AFEM-TDP) has created a protocol for trauma data collection in resource-limited settings using a clinical chart with embedded standardized data points that facilitates a systematic approach to injured patients. We performed a process evaluation of the protocol's implementation at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to provide insights for adapting the protocol to our setting.MethodsDuring the pilot implementation period, the quality of collected data was assessed. Structured key informant interviews about participant experiences and perceptions of the protocol implementation were then conducted. Interviews were analysed using a SWOT model.ResultsDuring pilot data collection, the overall capture rate was 21%. Variables collected with high frequency included demographics, vital signs and ED diagnosis, while mechanism of injury and ED disposition were often missed. Key informant interviews identified Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats to the protocol. Strengths included improved patient care, enhanced training for junior providers and facilitated data collection. Weaknesses included inadequate supervision and challenges relating to the physical size of the form, which resulted in missing data. Opportunities included retrospective research and quality improvement work. Threats included perceived lack of a local champion, poor buy-in from other hospital departments and need for ongoing financial support.ConclusionA mixed methods process evaluation is an invaluable tool when implementing novel data collection protocols, especially in resource-limited settings. We determined early successes and challenges of the implementation of the AFEM-TDP protocol and generated strategies to adapt the protocol to better suit our setting. Lessons from this process evaluation may be informative for other researchers designing and implementing similar data collection protocols.

Project description:Improving quality in children's mental health and social service settings will require implementation strategies capable of moving effective treatments and other innovations (e.g., assessment tools) into routine care. It is likely that efforts to identify, develop, and refine implementation strategies will be more successful if they are informed by relevant stakeholders and are responsive to the strengths and limitations of the contexts and implementation processes identified in usual care settings. This study will describe: the types of implementation strategies used; how organizational leaders make decisions about what to implement and how to approach the implementation process; organizational stakeholders' perceptions of different implementation strategies; and the potential influence of organizational culture and climate on implementation strategy selection, implementation decision-making, and stakeholders' perceptions of implementation strategies.This study is a mixed methods multiple case study of seven children's social service organizations in one Midwestern city in the United States that compose the control group of a larger randomized controlled trial. Qualitative data will include semi-structured interviews with organizational leaders (e.g., CEOs/directors, clinical directors, program managers) and a review of documents (e.g., implementation and quality improvement plans, program manuals, etc.) that will shed light on implementation decision-making and specific implementation strategies that are used to implement new programs and practices. Additionally, focus groups with clinicians will explore their perceptions of a range of implementation strategies. This qualitative work will inform the development of a Web-based survey that will assess the perceived effectiveness, relative importance, acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of implementation strategies from the perspective of both clinicians and organizational leaders. Finally, the Organizational Social Context measure will be used to assess organizational culture and climate. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods data will be analyzed and interpreted at the case level as well as across cases in order to highlight meaningful similarities, differences, and site-specific experiences.This study is designed to inform efforts to develop more effective implementation strategies by fully describing the implementation experiences of a sample of community-based organizations that provide mental health services to youth in one Midwestern city.

Project description:IntroductionThe prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rising steeply. National Health Service England (NHSE) is exploring the potential of a digital diabetes prevention programme (DDPP) and has commissioned a pilot with embedded evaluation.Methods and analysisThis study aims to determine whether, and if so, how, should NHSE implement a national DDPP, using a mixed-methods pretest and post-test design, underpinned by two theoretical frameworks: the Coventry, Aberdeen and London - Refined (CALO-RE) taxonomy of behavioural change techniques for the digital interventions and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for implementation processes. In eight pilot areas across England, adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 42-47 mmol/mol or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/L) and adults without NDH who are overweight (body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m2) or obese (BMI >30 kg/m2) will be referred to one of five digitally delivered diabetes prevention interventions. The primary outcomes are reduction in HbA1c and weight (for people with NDH) and reduction in weight (for people who are overweight or obese) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include use of the intervention, satisfaction, physical activity, patient activation and resources needed for successful implementation. Quantitative data will be collected at baseline, 6 months and 12 months by the digital intervention providers. Qualitative data will be collected through semistructured interviews with commissioners, providers, healthcare professionals and patients. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively and using generalised linear models to determine whether changes in outcomes are associated with demographic and intervention factors. Qualitative data will be analysed using framework analysis, with data pertaining to implementation mapped onto the CFIR.Ethics and disseminationThe study has received ethical approval from the Public Health England Ethics and Research Governance Group (reference R&D 324). Dissemination will include a report to NHSE to inform future policy and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Responsiveness to service users' views is a widely recognised objective of health systems. A key component of responsive health systems is effective interaction between users and service providers. Despite a growing literature on patient feedback from high-income settings, less is known about effectiveness of such systems in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS:This paper disseminates the protocol for an 18-month 'RESPOND' project that aims to evaluate the system of collecting and responding to user feedback in Bangladesh. This mixed-method study uses a realist evaluation approach to examine user feedback systems at two Upazila health complexes in Comilla District of Bangladesh, and comprises three steps: (1) initial theory development; (2) theory validation; and (3) theory refinement and development of lessons learnt. The project also uses (1) process evaluation to understand causal mechanisms and contexts of implementation; (2) statistical analysis of patient feedback to clarify the nature of issues reported; (3) social science methods to illuminate feedback processes and user and provider experiences; and (4) health policy and systems research to clarify issues related to integration of feedback systems with quality assurance and human resource management. During data analysis, qualitative and quantitative findings will be integrated throughout to help achieve study objectives. Analysis of qualitative and quantitative data will be done using a convergent mixed-methods model, involving continuous triangulation of multiple data sets to facilitate greater understanding of the context of user feedback systems including the links with relevant policies, practices and programmes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics approvals were obtained from the University of Leeds and the Bangladesh Medical Research Council. All data collected for this study will be anonymised, and identifying characteristics of respondents will not appear in a final manuscript or reports. The study findings will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Project description:BackgroundA new nationally commissioned NHS England Genomic Medicine Service (GMS) was recently established to deliver genomic testing with equity of access for patients affected by rare diseases and cancer. The overarching aim of this research is to evaluate the implementation of the GMS during its early years, identify barriers and enablers to successful implementation, and provide recommendations for practice. The focus will be on the use of genomic testing for paediatric rare diseases.MethodsThis will be a four-year mixed-methods research programme using clinic observations, interviews and surveys. Study 1 consists of qualitative interviews with designers/implementers of the GMS in Year 1 of the research programme, along with documentary analysis to understand the intended outcomes for the Service. These will be revisited in Year 4 to compare intended outcomes with what happened in practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators that were encountered along the way. Study 2 consists of clinic observations (pre-test counselling and results disclosure) to examine the interaction between health professionals and parents, along with follow-up interviews with both after each observation. Study 3 consists of a longitudinal survey with parents at two timepoints (time of testing and 12 months post-results) along with follow-up interviews, to examine parent-reported experiences and outcomes. Study 4 consists of qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey with medical specialists to identify preparedness, facilitators and challenges to mainstreaming genomic testing. The use of theory-based and prespecified constructs will help generalise the findings and enable integration across the various sub-studies.DisseminationWe will disseminate our results to policymakers as findings emerge, so any suggested changes to service provision can be considered in a timely manner. A workshop with key stakeholders will be held in Year 4 to develop and agree a set of recommendations for practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mental health service managers must take into account multiple factors when making decisions about the best way to deliver care to clients across increasingly larger service areas. This task is made more difficult by the lack of evidence and tools historically available to inform these decisions. In recent decades, the increasing availability of epidemiological and service use data for mental illness has solved the problem of evidence, but there still exists a challenge to make these data easily accessible and understandable for managers. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to develop a simulation modeling tool to allow managers to explore various service configurations in virtual reality, enabling predictions to be made about the cost and quality of care. METHODS:This is a longitudinal, mixed-methods case study, comprising overlapping intervention and evaluation phases. In partnership with senior managers of a mental health program, the researchers will develop a series of simulation models in Arena to address key strategic issues facing the service. Thematic and content analyses of semistructured interviews, meeting observations, and document analysis will be used to evaluate the process of model implementation and the outcomes for both researchers and managers. The study is being conducted in Australia. RESULTS:Data collection has been ongoing since late 2013. To date, 3 prototype simulation models have been developed and presented to senior managers, and 18 evaluation interviews have been conducted. The project is expected to conclude in late 2018. CONCLUSIONS:Findings of this study have the potential to shape decision making in mental health service delivery, by providing key examples of how to integrate patient data using simulation modeling. In addition, the results will provide key insights into how researchers and consultants can effectively implement simulation modeling in real-world health care organizations. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR1-10.2196/11119.

Project description:BackgroundThe international scale and spread of evidence-based perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery (POPS) services has not yet been fully realised. Implementation science provides a structured approach to understanding factors that act as barriers and facilitators to the implementation of POPS services. In this study, we aimed to identify factors that influence the implementation of POPS services in the UK.MethodsA qualitative case study at three UK health services was undertaken. The health services differed across contextual factors (population, workforce, size) and stages of POPS service implementation maturity. Semi-structured interviews with purposively sampled clinicians (perioperative medical, nursing, allied health, and pharmacy) and managers (n = 56) were conducted. Data were inductively coded, then thematically analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsFourteen factors across all five CFIR domains were relevant to the implementation of POPS services. Key shared facilitators included stakeholders understanding the rationale of the POPS service, with support from their networks, POPS champions, and POPS clinical leads. We found substantial variation and flexibility in the way that health services responded to these shared facilitators and this was relevant to the implementation of POPS services.ConclusionsHealth services planning to implement a POPS service should use health service-specific strategies to respond flexibly to local factors that are acting as barriers or facilitators to implementation. To support implementation of a POPS service, we recommend health services prioritise understanding local networks, identifying POPS champions, and ensuring that stakeholders understand the rationale for the POPS service. Our study also provides a structure for future research to understand the factors associated with 'unsuccessful' implementation of a POPS service, which can inform ongoing efforts to implement evidence-based perioperative models of care for older people.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Technology-enabled services (TESs), which integrate human service and digital components, are popular strategies to increase the reach and impact of mental health interventions, but large-scale implementation of TESs has lagged behind their potential. OBJECTIVE:This study applied a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach to gather input from multiple key user groups (students and educators) and to understand the factors that support successful implementation (implementation determinants) and implementation outcomes of a TES for universal screening, ongoing monitoring, and support for suicide risk management in the school setting. METHODS:A total of 111 students in the 9th to 12th grade completed measures regarding implementation outcomes (acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness) via an open-ended survey. A total of 9 school personnel (school-based mental health clinicians, nurses, and administrators) completed laboratory-based usability testing of a dashboard tracking the suicide risk of students, quantitative measures, and qualitative interviews to understand key implementation outcomes and determinants. School personnel were presented with a series of scenarios and common tasks focused on the basic features and functions of the dashboard. Directed content analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to extract multilevel determinants (ie, the barriers or facilitators at the levels of the outer setting, inner setting, individuals, intervention, and implementation process) related to positive implementation outcomes of the TES. RESULTS:Overarching themes related to implementation determinants and outcomes suggest that both student and school personnel users view TESs for suicide prevention as moderately feasible and acceptable based on the Acceptability of Intervention Measure and Feasibility of Intervention Measure and as needing improvements in usability based on the System Usability Scale. Qualitative results suggest that students and school personnel view passive data collection based on social media data as a relative advantage to the current system; however, the findings indicate that the TES and the school setting need to address issues of privacy, integration into existing workflows and communication patterns, and options for individualization for student-centered care. CONCLUSIONS:Innovative suicide prevention strategies that rely on passive data collection in the school context are a promising and appealing idea. Usability testing identified key issues for revision to facilitate widespread implementation.

Project description:BackgroundHealth and social service providers receive limited education on recognizing and responding to family violence. With adequate education, providers could be prepared to identify individuals subjected to family violence and help reduce the risk of associated impairment. Informed by the Active Implementation Frameworks, our research will determine the scope of strategies needed for the uptake and sustainability of educational interventions focused on family violence for providers. It will also determine the acceptability, feasibility, and proof-of-concept for a new educational intervention, called VEGA (Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action), for developing and improving primary care provider knowledge and skills in family violence.MethodsThis paper details the protocol for the Researching the Impact of Service provider Education (RISE) Project. The RISE Project follows a sequential multiphase mixed method research design; qualitative and quantitative data are being collected and integrated over three conceptually and methodologically linked research phases. Activities primarily occur in Ontario, Alberta, and Quebec. Phase 1 uses a sequential exploratory mixed method research design to characterize the scope and salience of learning and implementation needs and preferences for family violence education. Phase 2 will use an embedded mixed method research design to determine whether VEGA technology supports providers to achieve their family violence learning goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction. Phase 3 will use a concurrent mixed method research design to determine acceptability, feasibility, and proof-of-concept for evaluating whether VEGA improves primary care providers' knowledge and skills in family violence. This final phase will provide information on implementation strategies for family violence education in the "real world." It will also generate data on provider recruitment, retention, and data completeness, as well as exploratory estimates of the effect for provider outcome measures proposed for a randomized controlled trial.DiscussionThe RISE Project comprehensively integrates an implementation approach to improve family violence education for the health and social service professions. It will provide important information about factors that could influence the uptake and effectiveness of a health profession's educational intervention into the real world, as well as provide foundational evidence concerning the tenability of using a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of VEGA in primary care settings.

Dataset Information

Mixed-methods evaluation of the Perioperative Medicine Service for High-Risk Patients Implementation Pilot (POMSHIP): a study protocol.

Publications

Mixed-methods evaluation of the Perioperative Medicine Service for High-Risk Patients Implementation Pilot (POMSHIP): a study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets