Cargando…

Association between the number of adopted implementation strategies and contextual determinants: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND: The successful implementation of evidence-based innovations to improve healthcare delivery often requires a well-planned strategy to support their use. With a greater recognition of the importance of an implementation process, researchers have turned their attention to implementation str...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karabukayeva, Aizhan, Hearld, Larry R., Kelly, Reena, Hall, Allyson, Singh, Jasvinder
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9746001/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36514102
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08736-2
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The successful implementation of evidence-based innovations to improve healthcare delivery often requires a well-planned strategy to support their use. With a greater recognition of the importance of an implementation process, researchers have turned their attention to implementation strategies and their customization to target specific organizational barriers and facilitators. Further, there is a paucity of empirical evidence demonstrating the link between implementation determinants and the number of selected implementation strategies. The purpose of this mixed methods analysis is to examine how formatively assessed barriers and facilitators to implementation relate to the number and type of implementation strategies adopted to address context-specific factors. METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation that included 15 rheumatology clinics throughout the United States that were planning for implementation of an evidence-based shared decision-making aid for patients with lupus. Quantitative data consisted of a count of the number of implementation strategies used by a clinic. Qualitative data collection was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and relied upon semi-structured interviews with 90 clinic members between November 2018 and August 2019. RESULTS: Using the CFIR, we found that local clinic factors (Inner Setting Domain) resulted in different perceptions about Planning and Executing the DA (Process Domain); these domains were most likely to distinguish between the number and type of implementation strategies adopted by the clinics. In contrast, Intervention characteristics, Individual Characteristics, and the Outer Setting did not differentiate between the groups with different numbers of implementation strategies. The number and type of chosen strategies were not those associated with the context-specific factors. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show that, despite recognition of the value of customizing implementation strategies for the contexts in which they are applied, they are too often chosen in a manner that fail to adequately reflect the diverse settings that may present unique factors associated with implementation. Our findings also highlight the importance of the inner context – both in terms of structural characteristics and existing work processes – as a driving factor for why some organizations select different numbers and types of implementation strategies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08736-2.