Scaling up improvements more quickly and effectively

Strategies used throughout the scaling-up process of eConsult - Multiple case study of four Canadian Provinces

BACKGROUND

eConsult is a model of asynchronous communication connecting primary care providers to specialists to discuss patient care. This study aims to analyze the scaling-up process and identify strategies used to support scaling-up efforts in four provinces in Canada.

METHODS

We conducted a multiple case study with four cases (ON, QC, MB, NL). Data collection methods included document review (n = 93), meeting observations (n = 65) and semi-structured interviews (n = 40). Each case was analyzed based on Milat's framework.

RESULTS

The first scaling-up phase was marked by the rigorous evaluation of eConsult pilot projects and the publication of over 90 scientific papers. In the second phase, provinces implemented provincial multi-stakeholder committees, institutionalized the evaluation, and produced documents detailing the scaling-up plan. During the third phase, efforts were made to lead proofs of concept, obtain the endorsement of national and provincial organizations, and mobilize alternate sources of funding. The last phase was mainly observed in Ontario, where the creation of a provincial governance structure and strategies were put in place to monitor the service and manage changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Various strategies need to be used throughout the scaling-up process. The process remains challenging and lengthy because health systems lack clear processes to support innovation scaling-up.

Development of the SPREAD framework to support the scaling of de-implementation strategies: a mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to increase the understanding of the scaling of de-implementation strategies by identifying the determinants of the process and developing a determinant framework.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This study has a mixed-methods design. First, we performed an integrative review to build a literature-based framework describing the determinants of the scaling of healthcare innovations and interventions. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies from 1995 to December 2020. We systematically extracted the determinants of the scaling of interventions and developed a literature-based framework. Subsequently, this framework was discussed in four focus groups with national and international de-implementation experts. The literature-based framework was complemented by the findings of the focus group meetings and adapted for the scaling of de-implementation strategies.

RESULTS

The literature search resulted in 42 articles that discussed the determinants of the scaling of innovations and interventions. No articles described determinants specifically for de-implementation strategies. During the focus groups, all participants agreed on the relevance of the extracted determinants for the scaling of de-implementation strategies. The experts emphasised that while the determinants are relevant for various countries, the implications differ due to different contexts, cultures and histories. The analyses of the focus groups resulted in additional topics and determinants, namely, medical training, professional networks, interests of stakeholders, clinical guidelines and patients' perspectives. The results of the focus group meetings were combined with the literature framework, which together formed the supporting the scaling of de-implementation strategies (SPREAD) framework. The SPREAD framework includes determinants from four domains: (1) scaling plan, (2) external context, (3) de-implementation strategy and (4) adopters.

CONCLUSIONS

The SPREAD framework describes the determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies. These determinants are potential targets for various parties to facilitate the scaling of de-implementation strategies. Future research should validate these determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies.

Complexities and Context of Scaling Up: A Qualitative Study of Stakeholder Perspectives of Scaling Physical Activity and Nutrition Interventions in Australia

Background

Scaling up population health interventions is a context-orientated, dynamic and multi-stakeholder process; understanding its influences is essential to enhance future scaling efforts. Using physical activity and nutrition interventions in Australia as case examples, the aim of this paper is to identify core influences involved in scaling up physical activity and nutrition interventions, and how these may differ by context and stakeholder.

Methods

A qualitative study involving semi-structured telephone interviews with individuals representing academic, government and non-government organizations with involvement in scaling up state and national physical activity and nutrition interventions. Interview questions were derived from the WHO report “20 Questions for Developing a Scaling up Case Study”, and mapped against four key principles and five core areas in the WHO ExpandNet framework for scaling up: (1) The innovation; (2) User organization; (3) Environment; (4) Resource team and; (5) Scale up strategy. Data were analyzed thematically.

Results

Nineteen interviews were conducted (government = 3; non-government = 5; and academic = 11 sectors) involving eight scaled up interventions, targeting nutrition (n = 2), physical activity (n = 1) or a combination (n = 5). Most themes aligned to the “Environment”, including: (i) political (e.g., personal agendas); (ii) social (e.g., lack of urgency); and (iii) sector/workforce (e.g., scale up accountability) factors. Themes relating to “Scale up strategy” (e.g., flexibility and evaluation transparency) were next most commonly occurring. Whilst themes were broadly consistent across participants, government participants had a more policy-oriented perspective on the scale up process. Academics discussed a tension between the generation and use of evidence, and the influence of political climates/interest on scale up decisions.

Conclusion

Attributes of the “Environment” and “Scale up strategy” consistently featured as major influences on successful outcomes, while the role of evidence differed greatly between participant groups. A multisector scale up strategy for future interventions may enable the complexities of environmental and political contexts to be incorporated into scale up planning.

A review of implementation frameworks to operationalize health technology assessment recommendations for medical technologies in the Singapore setting

BACKGROUND

Methodologies of health technology assessment (HTA) for medical technologies are well established; yet, operational frameworks that enable appropriate uptake of HTA recommendations into routine clinical practice are lacking. This review aims to identify the key themes needed to guide the planning and implementation of HTA subsidy decisions for medical technologies such as diagnostics, medical devices, and services and to monitor their impact on a complex multipayer healthcare system like Singapore.

METHODS

A literature search of implementation frameworks was conducted up to 20 December 2020 and was documented in a flow diagram. A thematic analysis of the evidence base was performed using the Braun and Clark approach to identify key themes, from which an implementation framework suitable for Singapore's healthcare system could be developed.

RESULTS

The searches yielded forty-four articles for review, from which twenty themes were identified. The top ten themes constituted the key themes of implementation essential for local adaptation and were categorized into five domains: implementation strategy, organizational support, stakeholder engagement, information dissemination, and implementation outcomes and evaluation. These domains provide operational guidance to methodically identify gaps to facilitate sustainable implementation of HTA-informed medical technology subsidy decisions.

CONCLUSION

A robust and adaptable implementation of HTA-informed subsidy decisions is crucial to optimize its intended impact of improving patient outcomes per dollar spent. The key themes of an implementation framework should capture the important aspects of organizational feasibility to ensure successful adoption in a complex multipayer healthcare system like Singapore.

Scale-up and sustainability of a personalized end-of-life care intervention: a longitudinal mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Scaling-up and sustaining healthcare interventions can be challenging. Our objective was to describe how the 3 Wishes Project (3WP), a personalized end-of-life intervention, was scaled-up and sustained in an intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

In a longitudinal mixed-methods study from January 12,013 - December 31, 2018, dying patients and families were invited to participate if the probability of patient death was > 95% or after a decision to withdraw life support. A research team member or bedside clinician learned more about each of the patients and their family, then elicited and implemented at least 3 personalized wishes for patients and/or family members. We used a qualitative descriptive approach to analyze interviews and focus groups conducted with 25 clinicians who cared for the enrolled patients. We used descriptive statistics to summarize patient, wish, and clinician characteristics, and analyzed outcome data in quarters using Statistical Process Control charts. The primary outcome was enrollment of terminally ill patients and respective families; the secondary outcome was the number of wishes per patient; tertiary outcomes included wish features and stakeholder involvement.

RESULTS

Both qualitative and quantitative analyses suggested a three-phase approach to the scale-up of this intervention during which 369 dying patients were enrolled, having 2039 terminal wishes implemented. From a research project to clinical program to an approach to practice, we documented a three-fold increase in enrolment with a five-fold increase in total wishes implemented, without a change in cost. Beginning as a study, the protocol provided structure; starting gradually enabled frontline staff to experience and recognize the value of acts of compassion for patients, families, and clinicians. The transition to a clinical program was marked by handover from the research staff to bedside staff, whereby project catalysts mentored project champions to create staff partnerships, and family engagement became more intentional. The final transition involved empowering staff to integrate the program as an approach to care, expanding it within and beyond the organization.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3WP is an end-of-life intervention which was implemented as a study, scaled-up into a clinical program, and sustained by becoming integrated into practice as an approach to care.

Spread, Scale-up, and Sustainability of Video Consulting in Health Care: Systematic Review and Synthesis Guided by the NASSS Framework

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has thrust video consulting into the limelight, as health care practitioners worldwide shift to delivering care remotely. Evidence suggests that video consulting is acceptable, safe, and effective in selected conditions and settings. However, research to date has mostly focused on initial adoption, with limited consideration of how video consulting can be mainstreamed and sustained.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to do the following: (1) review and synthesize reported opportunities, challenges, and lessons learned in the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of video consultations, and (2) identify transferable insights that can inform policy and practice.

METHODS

We identified papers through systematic searches in PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Included articles reported on synchronous, video-based consultations that had spread to more than one setting beyond an initial pilot or feasibility stage, and were published since 2010. We used the Nonadoption, Abandonment, and challenges to the Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework to synthesize findings relating to 7 domains: an understanding of the health condition(s) for which video consultations were being used, the material properties of the technological platform and relevant peripherals, the value proposition for patients and developers, the role of the adopter system, organizational factors, wider macro-level considerations, and emergence over time.

RESULTS

We identified 13 papers describing 10 different video consultation services in 6 regions, covering the following: (1) video-to-home services, connecting providers directly to the patient; (2) hub-and-spoke models, connecting a provider at a central hub to a patient at a rural center; and (3) large-scale top-down evaluations scaled up or spread across a national health administration. Services covered rehabilitation, geriatrics, cancer surgery, diabetes, and mental health, as well as general specialist care and primary care. Potential enablers of spread and scale-up included embedded leadership and the presence of a telehealth champion, appropriate reimbursement mechanisms, user-friendly technology, pre-existing staff relationships, and adaptation (of technology and services) over time. Challenges tended to be related to service development, such as the absence of a long-term strategic plan, resistance to change, cost and reimbursement issues, and the technical experience of staff. There was limited articulation of the challenges to scale-up and spread of video consultations. This was combined with a lack of theorization, with papers tending to view spread and scale-up as the sum of multiple technical implementations, rather than theorizing the distinct processes required to achieve widespread adoption.

CONCLUSIONS

There remains a significant lack of evidence that can support the spread and scale-up of video consulting. Given the recent pace of change due to COVID-19, a more definitive evidence base is urgently needed to support global efforts and match enthusiasm for extending use.

Mapping the Status of Healthcare Improvement Science through a Narrative Review in Six European Countries

With the aim to explore how improvement science is understood, taught, practiced, and its impact on quality healthcare across Europe, the Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers (ISTEW) project "Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers" was funded by the European Commission and integrated by 7 teams from different European countries. As part of the project, a narrative literature review was conducted between 2008 and 2019, including documents in all partners' languages from 26 databases. Data collection and analysis involved a common database. Validation took place through partners' discussions. Referring to healthcare improvement science (HIS), a variety of terms, tools, and techniques were reported with no baseline definition or specific framework. All partner teams were informed about the non-existence of a specific term equivalent to HIS in their mother languages, except for the English-speaking countries. A lack of consensus, regarding the understanding and implementation of HIS into the healthcare and educational contexts was found. Our findings have brought to light the gap existing in HIS within Europe, far from other nations, such as the US, where there is a clearer HIS picture. As a consequence, the authors suggest further developing the standardization of HIS understanding and education in Europe.

The unpredictable journeys of spreading, sustaining and scaling healthcare innovations: a scoping review

Innovation has the potential to improve the quality of care and health service delivery, but maximising the reach and impact of innovation to achieve large-scale health system transformation remains understudied. Interest is growing in three processes of the innovation journey within health systems, namely the spread, sustainability and scale-up (3S) of innovation. Recent reviews examine what we know about these processes. However, there is little research on how to support and operationalise the 3S. This study aims to improve our understanding of the 3S of healthcare innovations. We focus specifically on the definitions of the 3S, the mechanisms that underpin them, and the conditions that either enable or limit their potential. We conducted a scoping review, systematically investigating six bibliographic databases to search, screen and select relevant literature on the 3S of healthcare innovations. We screened 641 papers, then completed a full-text review of 112 identified as relevant based on title and abstract. A total of 24 papers were retained for analysis. Data were extracted and synthesised through descriptive and inductive thematic analysis. From this, we develop a framework of actionable guidance for health system actors aiming to leverage the 3S of innovation across five key areas of focus, as follows: (1) focus on the why, (2) focus on perceived-value and feasibility, (3) focus on what people do, rather than what they should be doing, (4) focus on creating a dialogue between policy and delivery, and (5) focus on inclusivity and capacity building. While there is no standardised approach to foster the 3S of healthcare innovations, a variety of practical frameworks and tools exist to support stakeholders along this journey.

Spreading and scaling up innovation and improvement

Disseminating innovation across the healthcare system is challenging but potentially achievable through different logics: mechanistic, ecological, and social, say Trisha Greenhalgh and Chrysanthi Papoutsi

Adapting improvements to context: when, why and how?

There is evidence that practitioners applying quality improvements often adapt the improvement method or the change they are implementing, either unknowingly, or intentionally to fit their service or situation. This has been observed especially in programs seeking to spread or 'scale up' an improvement change to other services. Sometimes their adaptations result in improved outcomes, sometimes they do not, and sometimes they do not have data make this assessment or to describe the adaptation. The purpose of this paper is to summarize key points about adaptation and context discussed at the Salzburg Global Seminar in order to help improvers judge when and how to adapt an improvement change. It aims also to encourage more research into such adaptations to develop our understanding of the when, why and how of effective adaptation and to provide more research informed guidance to improvers.The paper gives examples to illustrate key issues in adaptation and to consider more systematic and purposeful adaptation of improvements so as to increase the chances of achieving improvements in different settings for different participants. We describe methods for assessing whether adaptation is necessary or likely to reduce the effectiveness of an improvement intervention, which adaptations might be required, and methods for collecting data to assess whether the adaptations are successful. We also note areas where research is most needed in order to enable more effective scale up of quality improvements changes and wider take up and use of the methods.