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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacFarlane, Anne, Clerkin, Pauline, Murray, Elizabeth, Heaney, David J, Wakeling, Mary, Pesola, Ulla-Maija, Waterworth, Eva Lindh, Larsen, Frank, Makiniemi, Minna, Winblad, Ilkka
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