Cargando…
The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries
BACKGROUND: Implementation researchers have attempted to overcome the research-practice gap in e-health by developing tools that summarize and synthesize research evidence of factors that impede or facilitate implementation of innovation in healthcare settings. The e-Health Implementation Toolkit (e...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3283514/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22098945 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-122 |
_version_ | 1782224201516580864 |
---|---|
author | MacFarlane, Anne Clerkin, Pauline Murray, Elizabeth Heaney, David J Wakeling, Mary Pesola, Ulla-Maija Waterworth, Eva Lindh Larsen, Frank Makiniemi, Minna Winblad, Ilkka |
author_facet | MacFarlane, Anne Clerkin, Pauline Murray, Elizabeth Heaney, David J Wakeling, Mary Pesola, Ulla-Maija Waterworth, Eva Lindh Larsen, Frank Makiniemi, Minna Winblad, Ilkka |
author_sort | MacFarlane, Anne |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Implementation researchers have attempted to overcome the research-practice gap in e-health by developing tools that summarize and synthesize research evidence of factors that impede or facilitate implementation of innovation in healthcare settings. The e-Health Implementation Toolkit (e-HIT) is an example of such a tool that was designed within the context of the United Kingdom National Health Service to promote implementation of e-health services. Its utility in international settings is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative evaluation of the e-HIT in use across four countries--Finland, Norway, Scotland, and Sweden. Data were generated using a combination of interview approaches (n = 22) to document e-HIT users' experiences of the tool to guide decision making about the selection of e-health pilot services and to monitor their progress over time. RESULTS: e-HIT users evaluated the tool positively in terms of its scope to organize and enhance their critical thinking about their implementation work and, importantly, to facilitate discussion between those involved in that work. It was easy to use in either its paper- or web-based format, and its visual elements were positively received. There were some minor criticisms of the e-HIT with some suggestions for content changes and comments about its design as a generic tool (rather than specific to sites and e-health services). However, overall, e-HIT users considered it to be a highly workable tool that they found useful, which they would use again, and which they would recommend to other e-health implementers. CONCLUSION: The use of the e-HIT is feasible and acceptable in a range of international contexts by a range of professionals for a range of different e-health systems. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3283514 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32835142012-02-22 The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries MacFarlane, Anne Clerkin, Pauline Murray, Elizabeth Heaney, David J Wakeling, Mary Pesola, Ulla-Maija Waterworth, Eva Lindh Larsen, Frank Makiniemi, Minna Winblad, Ilkka Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: Implementation researchers have attempted to overcome the research-practice gap in e-health by developing tools that summarize and synthesize research evidence of factors that impede or facilitate implementation of innovation in healthcare settings. The e-Health Implementation Toolkit (e-HIT) is an example of such a tool that was designed within the context of the United Kingdom National Health Service to promote implementation of e-health services. Its utility in international settings is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative evaluation of the e-HIT in use across four countries--Finland, Norway, Scotland, and Sweden. Data were generated using a combination of interview approaches (n = 22) to document e-HIT users' experiences of the tool to guide decision making about the selection of e-health pilot services and to monitor their progress over time. RESULTS: e-HIT users evaluated the tool positively in terms of its scope to organize and enhance their critical thinking about their implementation work and, importantly, to facilitate discussion between those involved in that work. It was easy to use in either its paper- or web-based format, and its visual elements were positively received. There were some minor criticisms of the e-HIT with some suggestions for content changes and comments about its design as a generic tool (rather than specific to sites and e-health services). However, overall, e-HIT users considered it to be a highly workable tool that they found useful, which they would use again, and which they would recommend to other e-health implementers. CONCLUSION: The use of the e-HIT is feasible and acceptable in a range of international contexts by a range of professionals for a range of different e-health systems. BioMed Central 2011-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3283514/ /pubmed/22098945 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-122 Text en Copyright ©2011 MacFarlane et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research MacFarlane, Anne Clerkin, Pauline Murray, Elizabeth Heaney, David J Wakeling, Mary Pesola, Ulla-Maija Waterworth, Eva Lindh Larsen, Frank Makiniemi, Minna Winblad, Ilkka The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries |
title | The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries |
title_full | The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries |
title_fullStr | The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries |
title_full_unstemmed | The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries |
title_short | The e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four European countries |
title_sort | e-health implementation toolkit: qualitative evaluation across four european countries |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3283514/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22098945 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-122 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT macfarlaneanne theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT clerkinpauline theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT murrayelizabeth theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT heaneydavidj theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT wakelingmary theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT pesolaullamaija theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT waterworthevalindh theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT larsenfrank theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT makiniemiminna theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT winbladilkka theehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT macfarlaneanne ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT clerkinpauline ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT murrayelizabeth ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT heaneydavidj ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT wakelingmary ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT pesolaullamaija ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT waterworthevalindh ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT larsenfrank ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT makiniemiminna ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries AT winbladilkka ehealthimplementationtoolkitqualitativeevaluationacrossfoureuropeancountries |