Adapting rapid assessment procedures for implementation research using a team-based approach to analysis: a case example of patient quality and safety interventions in the ICU.
Academic Medical Centers
/ organization & administration
Communication
Group Processes
Humans
Implementation Science
Information Technology
/ standards
Inservice Training
/ organization & administration
Intensive Care Units
/ organization & administration
Learning Health System
/ organization & administration
Organizational Culture
Patient Safety
/ standards
Quality of Health Care
/ organization & administration
Time Factors
United States
Workflow
Hybrid designs
Intensive care
Patient safety
Qualitative methods
Rapid assessment procedures
Team-based analysis
Journal
Implementation science : IS
ISSN: 1748-5908
Titre abrégé: Implement Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101258411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 02 2020
22 02 2020
Historique:
received:
17
09
2019
accepted:
12
02
2020
entrez:
24
2
2020
pubmed:
24
2
2020
medline:
3
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Innovations to improve quality and safety in healthcare are increasingly complex, targeting multiple disciplines and organizational levels, and often requiring significant behavior change by those delivering care. Learning health systems must tackle the crucial task of understanding the implementation and effectiveness of complex interventions, but may be hampered in their efforts by limitations in study design imposed by business-cycle timelines and implementation into fast-paced clinical environments. Rapid assessment procedures are a pragmatic option for producing timely, contextually rich evaluative information about complex interventions implemented into dynamic clinical settings. We describe our adaptation of rapid assessment procedures and introduce a rapid team-based analysis process using an example of an evaluation of an intensive care unit (ICU) redesign initiative aimed at improving patient safety in four academic medical centers across the USA. Steps in our approach included (1) iteratively working with stakeholders to develop evaluation questions; (2) integration of implementation science frameworks into field guides and analytic tools; (3) selecting and training a multidisciplinary site visit team; (4) preparation and trust building for 2-day site visits; (5) engaging sites in a participatory approach to data collection; (6) rapid team analysis and triangulation of data sources and methods using a priori charts derived from implementation frameworks; and (7) validation of findings with sites. We used the rapid assessment approach at each of the four ICU sites to evaluate the implementation of the sites' innovations. Though the ICU projects all included three common components, they were individually developed to suit the local context and had mixed implementation outcomes. We generated in-depth case summaries describing the overall implementation process for each site; implementation barriers and facilitators for all four sites are presented. One of the site case summaries is presented as an example of findings generated using the method. A rapid team-based approach to qualitative analysis using charts and team discussion using validation techniques, such as member-checking, can be included as part of rapid assessment procedures. Our work demonstrates the value of including rapid assessment procedures for implementation research when time and resources are limited.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Innovations to improve quality and safety in healthcare are increasingly complex, targeting multiple disciplines and organizational levels, and often requiring significant behavior change by those delivering care. Learning health systems must tackle the crucial task of understanding the implementation and effectiveness of complex interventions, but may be hampered in their efforts by limitations in study design imposed by business-cycle timelines and implementation into fast-paced clinical environments. Rapid assessment procedures are a pragmatic option for producing timely, contextually rich evaluative information about complex interventions implemented into dynamic clinical settings.
METHODS
We describe our adaptation of rapid assessment procedures and introduce a rapid team-based analysis process using an example of an evaluation of an intensive care unit (ICU) redesign initiative aimed at improving patient safety in four academic medical centers across the USA. Steps in our approach included (1) iteratively working with stakeholders to develop evaluation questions; (2) integration of implementation science frameworks into field guides and analytic tools; (3) selecting and training a multidisciplinary site visit team; (4) preparation and trust building for 2-day site visits; (5) engaging sites in a participatory approach to data collection; (6) rapid team analysis and triangulation of data sources and methods using a priori charts derived from implementation frameworks; and (7) validation of findings with sites.
RESULTS
We used the rapid assessment approach at each of the four ICU sites to evaluate the implementation of the sites' innovations. Though the ICU projects all included three common components, they were individually developed to suit the local context and had mixed implementation outcomes. We generated in-depth case summaries describing the overall implementation process for each site; implementation barriers and facilitators for all four sites are presented. One of the site case summaries is presented as an example of findings generated using the method.
CONCLUSIONS
A rapid team-based approach to qualitative analysis using charts and team discussion using validation techniques, such as member-checking, can be included as part of rapid assessment procedures. Our work demonstrates the value of including rapid assessment procedures for implementation research when time and resources are limited.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32087724
doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-0972-5
pii: 10.1186/s13012-020-0972-5
pmc: PMC7036173
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
12Références
Can J Public Health. 2006 Jan-Feb;97(1):24-8
pubmed: 16512322
BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Jan;22(1):11-8
pubmed: 22849965
Fam Pract Res J. 1994 Sep;14(3):289-97
pubmed: 7976480
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Jul;26(7):588-594
pubmed: 27932546
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2019 Mar;46(2):255-270
pubmed: 30488143
Health Educ Q. 1991 Spring;18(1):111-23
pubmed: 2037494
Ann Fam Med. 2005 Jul-Aug;3(4):360-4
pubmed: 16046570
Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 07;4:50
pubmed: 19664226
Implement Sci. 2019 Feb 1;14(1):11
pubmed: 30709368
Qual Health Res. 2017 Mar;27(4):591-608
pubmed: 27670770
Am J Public Health. 1999 Sep;89(9):1322-7
pubmed: 10474547
BMJ. 2016 Feb 01;352:i154
pubmed: 26830458
Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760
pubmed: 26613970
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 May;24(5):325-36
pubmed: 25810415
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008 Nov 06;:26-30
pubmed: 18999075
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2016 Oct;21(4):215-6
pubmed: 27522068
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 Sep;42(5):508-23
pubmed: 24722814
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 19;14:559
pubmed: 25407663
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jun 11;13:568
pubmed: 23758638
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285
Methods Inf Med. 2011;50(4):299-307
pubmed: 21170469
J Family Med Prim Care. 2015 Jul-Sep;4(3):324-7
pubmed: 26288766