User's perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing quality colonoscopy services in Canada: a study protocol

Barriers and Facilitators to Early Rehabilitation in the ICU: A Theory Driven Delphi Study

OBJECTIVES

There is conflicting evidence for the effectiveness of early rehabilitation in the intensive care and marked variation in rates of implementation in practice. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to early rehabilitation in mechanically ventilated patients and their relevance to practice, as perceived by key ICU clinicians across North America.

DESIGN

A Delphi study using the Theoretical Domains Framework, consisting of an initial qualitative round and subsequent quantitative rounds, was conducted to gather clinician agreement and perceived importance of barriers and facilitators to early rehabilitation. The survey included questions on the range of individual, sociocultural, and broader organizational influence on behaviors.

SETTING

Clinical practice in North America.

SUBJECTS

Four clinician groups (intensive care physicians, nurses, therapists, and respiratory therapists).

INTERVENTIONS

A three-round Delphi study.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Fifty of 74 (67%) of invited clinicians completed the study. Agreement and consensus with Delphi survey items were high in both rounds within and between professional groups. Agreement was highest for items related to the domain "Beliefs about Consequences" (e.g., mortality reduction) and lowest for items related to the domain "Behavioral Regulation" (e.g., team discussion of barriers). Beliefs expressed about improved mortality and improvements in a variety of other long-term outcomes were not consistent with the current evidence base. Individual agreement scores changed very little from Round 2 to Round 3 of the Delphi, suggesting stability of beliefs and existing consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified a wide range of beliefs about early rehabilitation that may influence provider behavior and the success and appropriateness of further implementation. The apparent inconsistency between the optimism of stakeholders regarding mortality reductions and a low level of implementation reported elsewhere represent the most major challenge to future implementation success. Other foci for future implementation work include planning, barriers, feedback, and education of staff.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) programs may result in quality of care and outcome improvement. However, the implementation of such programs has proven to be very challenging. This mixed methods systematic review identifies barriers and facilitators pertaining to the implementation of CQI programs in colonoscopy services and how they relate to endoscopists, nurses, managers, and patients.

METHODS

We developed a search strategy adapted to 15 databases. Studies had to report on the implementation of a CQI intervention and identified barriers or facilitators relating to any of the four groups of actors directly concerned by the provision of colonoscopies. The quality of the selected studies was assessed and findings were extracted, categorized, and synthesized using a generic extraction grid customized through an iterative process.

RESULTS

We extracted 99 findings from the 15 selected publications. Although involving all actors is the most cited factor, the literature mainly focuses on the facilitators and barriers associated with the endoscopists' perspective. The most reported facilitators to CQI implementation are perception of feasibility, adoption of a formative approach, training and education, confidentiality, and assessing a limited number of quality indicators. Receptive attitudes, a sense of ownership and perceptions of positive impacts also facilitate the implementation. Finally, an organizational environment conducive to quality improvement has to be inclusive of all user groups, explicitly supportive, and provide appropriate resources.

CONCLUSION

Our findings corroborate the current models of adoption of innovations. However, a significant knowledge gap remains with respect to barriers and facilitators pertaining to nurses, patients, and managers.