Understanding organisational development, sustainability, and diffusion of innovations within hospitals participating in a multilevel quality collaborative

How social networks influence the local implementation of initiatives developed in quality improvement collaboratives in health care: A qualitative process study

BACKGROUND

Quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) have facilitated cross-organizational knowledge exchange in health care. However, the local implementation of many quality improvement (QI) initiatives continues to fail, signaling a need to better understand the contributing factors. Organizational context, particularly the role of social networks in facilitating or hindering implementation within organizations, remains a potentially critical yet underexplored area to addressing this gap.

PURPOSE

We took a dynamic process perspective to understand how QI project managers' social networks influence the local implementation of QI initiatives developed through QICs.

METHODOLOGY

We explored the case of a QIC by triangulating data from an online survey, semistructured interviews, and archival documents from 10 organizations. We divided implementation into four stages and employed qualitative text analysis to examine the relationship between three characteristics of network structure (degree centrality, network density, and betweenness centrality) and the progress of each QI initiative.

RESULTS

The progress of QI initiatives varied considerably among organizations. The transition between stages was influenced by all three network characteristics to varying degrees, depending on the stage. Project managers whose QI initiatives progressed to advanced stages of implementation had formed ad hoc clusters of colleagues passionate about the initiatives.

CONCLUSION

Implementing QI initiatives appears to be facilitated by the formation of clusters of supportive individuals within organizations; this formation requires high betweenness centrality and high network density.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Flexibly modifying specific network characteristics depending on the stage of implementation may help project managers advance their QI initiatives, achieving more uniform results from QICs.

What are the features of high-performing quality improvement collaboratives? A qualitative case study of a state-wide collaboratives programme

OBJECTIVES

Despite their widespread use, the evidence base for the effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives remains mixed. Lack of clarity about 'what good looks like' in collaboratives remains a persistent problem. We aimed to identify the distinctive features of a state-wide collaboratives programme that has demonstrated sustained improvements in quality of care in a range of clinical specialties over a long period.

DESIGN

Qualitative case study involving interviews with purposively sampled participants, observations and analysis of documents.

SETTING

The Michigan Collaborative Quality Initiatives programme.

PARTICIPANTS

38 participants, including clinicians and managers from 10 collaboratives, and staff from the University of Michigan and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.

RESULTS

We identified five features that characterised success in the collaboratives programme: learning from positive deviance; high-quality coordination; high-quality measurement and comparative performance feedback; careful use of motivational levers; and mobilising professional leadership and building community. Rigorous measurement, securing professional leadership and engagement, cultivating a collaborative culture, creating accountability for quality, and relieving participating sites of unnecessary burdens associated with programme participation were all important to high performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings offer valuable learning for optimising collaboration-based approaches to improvement in healthcare, with implications for the design, structure and resourcing of quality improvement collaboratives. These findings are likely to be useful to clinicians, managers, policy-makers and health system leaders engaged in multiorganisational approaches to improving quality and safety.

Sustainable quality management in hospitals: The experiences of healthcare quality managers

BACKGROUND

Quality management systems are essential in hospitals, but evidence shows a real literature gap on the sustainable implementation of quality.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to explore and identify enablers towards sustainable quality management in hospitals. Research design and Study Sample: Interviews were conducted with 23 healthcare quality managers from 20 hospitals. Data collection and/or Analysis: Data collection and analysis were conducted simultaneously by using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven and following the COREQ Guidelines. Thematic analysis from interview transcripts was performed in NVivo 12.

RESULTS

The results reveal two categories: (1) quality in the organisation's DNA and (2) quality in the professional's DNA. The first category consists of: bottom-up and top-down management, the organisation-wide integration of quality and an organisational culture shift. The second one consists of: quality awareness, understanding the added value, the encouragement and engagement, the accountability and ownership for quality. Moving towards sustainable quality management systems in hospitals requires a good interaction between a bottom-up approach and leadership to ensure continuous support from healthcare stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to existing conceptual and theoretical foundations with practical insights into sustainable quality management. The findings can guide quality departments and hospital management to regain professionals' commitment to quality and to establish a sustainable quality management system.

How is return on investment from quality improvement programmes conceptualised by mental healthcare leaders and why: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Return on Investment (ROI), whereby the ratio of costs to benefits is assessed, is encouraged in-order to justify the value of Quality Improvement (QI) programmes. We previously performed a literature review to develop a ROI conceptual framework for QI programmes. We concluded that, QI-ROI is conceptualised as any monetary and non-monetary benefit. In the current study, we explored if this finding is shared by mental healthcare leaders. We also investigated the stability of this conceptualisation against influencing factors and potential for disinvestment.

METHODS

We performed qualitative interviews with leaders in an NHS mental health organisation. There were 16 participants: nine board members and seven senior leaders. The interviews were held online via Microsoft Teams and lasted an hour on average. We performed deductive-inductive analysis to seek data from our initial ROI framework and any new data.

RESULTS

We found that in mental healthcare, QI-ROI is also conceptualised as any valued monetary and non-monetary benefits. There was a strong emphasis on benefits to external partners and a de-emphasis of benefit monetisation. This conceptualisation was influenced by the 1) perceived mandates to improve quality and manage scarce resources, 2) expectations from QI, 3) health and social care values, 4) ambiguity over expectations, and 5) uncertainty over outcomes. Uncertainty, ambiguity, and potential for disinvestment posed a threat to the stability of this conceptualisation but did not ultimately change it. Health and social care values supported maintaining the QI-ROI as any benefit, with a focus on patients and staff outcomes. Socio-political desires to improve quality were strong drivers for QI investment.

CONCLUSION

Mental healthcare leaders primarily conceptualise QI-ROI as any valued benefit. The inclusion of externalised outcomes which are hard to attribute may be challenging. However, mental healthcare services do collaborate with external partners. The de-emphases of benefit monetisation may also be controversial due to the need for financial accountability. Mental healthcare leaders recognise the importance of efficiency savings. However, they raised concerns over the legitimacy and utility of traditional ROI as a tool for assessing QI value. Further research is needed to bring more clarity on these aspects of the QI-ROI concept.

Scaling up tobacco cessation within TB programmes: findings from a multi-country, mixed-methods implementation study

BACKGROUND

Brief behavioural support can effectively help tuberculosis (TB) patients quit smoking and improve their outcomes. In collaboration with TB programmes in Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan, we evaluated the implementation and scale-up of cessation support using four strategies: (1) brief tobacco cessation intervention, (2) integration of tobacco cessation within routine training, (3) inclusion of tobacco indicators in routine records and (4) embedding research within TB programmes.

METHODS

We used mixed methods of observation, interviews, questionnaires and routine data. We aimed to understand the extent and facilitators of vertical scale-up (institutionalization) within 59 health facility learning sites in Pakistan, 18 in Nepal and 15 in Bangladesh, and horizontal scale-up (increased coverage beyond learning sites). We observed training and surveyed all 169 TB health workers who were trained, in order to measure changes in their confidence in delivering cessation support. Routine TB data from the learning sites were analysed to assess intervention delivery and use of TB forms revised to report smoking status and cessation support provided. A purposive sample of TB health workers, managers and policy-makers were interviewed (Bangladesh n = 12; Nepal n = 13; Pakistan n = 19). Costs of scale-up were estimated using activity-based cost analysis.

RESULTS

Routine data indicated that health workers in learning sites asked all TB patients about tobacco use and offered them cessation support. Qualitative data showed use of intervention materials, often with adaptation and partial implementation in busy clinics. Short (1-2 hours) training integrated within existing programmes increased mean confidence in delivering cessation support by 17% (95% CI: 14-20%). A focus on health system changes (reporting, training, supervision) facilitated vertical scale-up. Dissemination of materials beyond learning sites and changes to national reporting forms and training indicated a degree of horizontal scale-up. Embedding research within TB health systems was crucial for horizontal scale-up and required the dynamic use of tactics including alliance-building, engagement in the wider policy process, use of insider researchers and a deep understanding of health system actors and processes.

CONCLUSIONS

System-level changes within TB programmes may facilitate routine delivery of cessation support to TB patients. These strategies are inexpensive, and with concerted efforts from TB programmes and donors, tobacco cessation can be institutionalized at scale.

Sustaining a nursing best practice guideline in an acute care setting over 10 years: A mixed methods case study

Background

To improve patient outcomes many healthcare organizations have undertaken a number of steps to enhance the quality of care, including the use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) such as clinical practice guidelines. However, there is little empirical understanding of the longer-term use of guideline-based practices and how to ensure their ongoing use. The aim of this study was to identify the determinants and knowledge translation interventions (KTIs) influencing ongoing use of selected recommendations of an institutional pain policy and protocol over time from an organizational perspective and 10 years post implementation on two units within an acute care setting.

Methods

We conducted a mixed methods case study guided by the Dynamic Sustainability Framework of an EBP 10 years post implementation. We examined protocol sustainability at the nursing department and unit levels of a multi-site tertiary center in Canada. Data sources included document review (n = 29), chart audits (n = 200), and semi-structured interviews with nurses at the department (n = 3) and unit (n = 16) level.

Results

We identified 32 sustainability determinants and 29 KTIs influencing ongoing use of an EBP in acute care. Three determinants and eight KTIs had a continuous influence in all three time periods: implementation phase (0-2 yrs), sustained phase (>2-10 yrs.), and at the 10-year mark. Implementation of KTIs evolved with the level of application (e.g., department vs. unit) to fit the EBP within the context highlighting the need to focus on determinants influencing ongoing use. Sustainability was associated with continual efforts of monitoring and providing timely feedback regarding adherence to recommendations. KTIs used to embed recommendations into routine practices/processes positively influenced high adherence rates. Use of a participatory approach for implementation and sustainment and linking KTIs designed to incrementally address low adherence rates facilitated sustainment.

Conclusion

This research provides insight into the relationship between implementation and sustainability determinants and related KTIs during implementation and sustained use phases. Unique determinants identified by department and unit nurses reflect their different perspectives toward the innovation based on their respective roles and responsibilities. KTIs fostered changed behaviors and facilitated EBP sustainment in acute care. Findings confirm the concept of sustainability is a dynamic "ongoing process."

A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis: Determinants of the Effectiveness and Sustainability of Measurement-Focused Quality Improvement Trainings

INTRODUCTION

The ability of health care professionals to measure change is critical for successful quality improvement (QI) efforts. Currently, there are no systematic reviews focusing on continuing education for health care professionals in data skills for QI. The purpose of this systematic review is to define effectiveness and sustainability of QI programs for health care professionals containing a measurement skills component and to identify barriers and facilitators to effectiveness and sustainability.

METHODS

The systematic review involved study identification, screening, full text review, and data extraction. Four electronics databases and grey literature sources were searched to identify studies published between 2009 and 2019 (11 years). A customized data extraction form was developed. Mixed methods appraisal tool was used for quality assessment and a thematic analysis was conducted for narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies from 11 countries were included. Most study designs were quantitative descriptive (17/53) and used a blended learning approach (25/53) combining face-to face and distance learning modes. The programs included basic, intermediate, and advanced data skills concepts. Overall, studies reported positive outcomes for participant reaction, learning, and behavior, but reported variable success in sustainability and spread of QI.

DISCUSSION

Studies discussed measurement as a key competency for clinical QI. Effectiveness definitions focused on the short-term impact of the programs, whereas sustainability definitions emphasized maintenance of outcomes and skills in the long-term. Factors that influenced effectiveness and sustainability of the included studies were strategic approach to QI, organizational support, intervention design, communication, accountability, leadership support, and learning networks.

How and under what circumstances do quality improvement collaboratives lead to better outcomes? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Quality improvement collaboratives are widely used to improve health care in both high-income and low and middle-income settings. Teams from multiple health facilities share learning on a given topic and apply a structured cycle of change testing. Previous systematic reviews reported positive effects on target outcomes, but the role of context and mechanism of change is underexplored. This realist-inspired systematic review aims to analyse contextual factors influencing intended outcomes and to identify how quality improvement collaboratives may result in improved adherence to evidence-based practices.

METHODS

We built an initial conceptual framework to drive our enquiry, focusing on three context domains: health facility setting; project-specific factors; wider organisational and external factors; and two further domains pertaining to mechanisms: intra-organisational and inter-organisational changes. We systematically searched five databases and grey literature for publications relating to quality improvement collaboratives in a healthcare setting and containing data on context or mechanisms. We analysed and reported findings thematically and refined the programme theory.

RESULTS

We screened 962 abstracts of which 88 met the inclusion criteria, and we retained 32 for analysis. Adequacy and appropriateness of external support, functionality of quality improvement teams, leadership characteristics and alignment with national systems and priorities may influence outcomes of quality improvement collaboratives, but the strength and quality of the evidence is weak. Participation in quality improvement collaborative activities may improve health professionals' knowledge, problem-solving skills and attitude; teamwork; shared leadership and habits for improvement. Interaction across quality improvement teams may generate normative pressure and opportunities for capacity building and peer recognition.

CONCLUSION

Our review offers a novel programme theory to unpack the complexity of quality improvement collaboratives by exploring the relationship between context, mechanisms and outcomes. There remains a need for greater use of behaviour change and organisational psychology theory to improve design, adaptation and evaluation of the collaborative quality improvement approach and to test its effectiveness. Further research is needed to determine whether certain contextual factors related to capacity should be a precondition to the quality improvement collaborative approach and to test the emerging programme theory using rigorous research designs.

The influence of contextual factors on healthcare quality improvement initiatives: a realist review

BACKGROUND

Recognising the influence of context and the context-sensitive nature of quality improvement (QI) interventions is crucial to implementing effective improvements and successfully replicating them in new settings, yet context is still poorly understood. To address this challenge, it is necessary to capture generalisable knowledge, first to understand which aspects of context are most important to QI and why, and secondly, to explore how these factors can be managed to support healthcare improvement, in terms of implementing successful improvement initiatives, achieving sustainability and scaling interventions. The research question was how and why does context influence quality improvement initiatives in healthcare?

METHODS

A realist review explored the contextual conditions that influence healthcare improvement. Realist methodology integrates theoretical understanding and stakeholder input with empirical research findings. The review aimed to identify and understand the role of context during the improvement cycle, i.e. planning, implementation, sustainability and transferability; and distil new knowledge to inform the design and development of context-sensitive QI initiatives. We developed a preliminary theory of the influence of context to arrive at a conceptual and theoretical framework.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were included in the review, demonstrating the interaction of key contextual factors across healthcare system levels during the improvement cycle. An evidence-based explanatory theoretical model is proposed to illustrate the interaction between contextual factors, system levels (macro, meso, micro) and the stages of the improvement journey. Findings indicate that the consideration of these contextual factors would enhance the design and delivery of improvement initiatives, across a range of improvement settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first realist review of context in QI and contributes to a deeper understanding of how context influences quality improvement initiatives. The distillation of key contextual factors offers the potential to inform the design and development of context-sensitive interventions to enhance improvement initiatives and address the challenge of spread and sustainability. Future research should explore the application of our conceptual model to enhance improvement-planning processes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017062135.

Sustainment, Sustainability, and Spread Study (SSaSSy): protocol for a study of factors that contribute to the sustainment, sustainability, and spread of practice changes introduced through an evidence-based quality-improvement intervention in Canadian nursing homes

Background

Implementation scientists and practitioners, alike, recognize the importance of sustaining practice change, however post-implementation studies of interventions are rare. This is a protocol for the Sustainment, Sustainability and Spread Study (SSaSSy). The purpose of this study is to contribute to knowledge on the sustainment (sustained use), sustainability (sustained benefits), and spread of evidence-based practice innovations in health care. Specifically, this is a post-implementation study of an evidence-informed, Care Aide-led, facilitation-based quality-improvement intervention called SCOPE (Safer Care for Older Persons (in long-term care) Environments). SCOPE has been implemented in nursing homes in the Canadian Provinces of Manitoba (MB), Alberta (AB) and British Columbia (BC). Our study has three aims: (i) to determine the role that adaptation/contextualization plays in sustainment, sustainability and spread of the SCOPE intervention; (ii) to study the relative effects on sustainment, sustainability and intra-organizational spread of high-intensity and low-intensity post-implementation “boosters”, and a “no booster” condition, and (iii) to compare the relative costs and impacts of each booster condition.

Methods/design

SSaSSy is a two-phase mixed methods study. The overarching design is convergent, with qualitative and quantitative data collected over a similar timeframe in each of the two phases, analyzed independently, then merged for analysis and interpretation. Phase 1 is a pilot involving up to 7 units in 7 MB nursing homes in which SCOPE was piloted in 2016 to 2017, in preparation for phase 2. Phase 2 will comprise a quasi-experiment with two treatment groups of low- and high-intensity post-implementation “boosters”, and an untreated control group (no booster), using pretests and post-tests of the dependent variables relating to sustained care and management practices, and resident outcomes. Phase 2 will involve 31 trial sites in BC (17 units) and AB (14 units) nursing homes, where the SCOPE trial concluded in May 2019.

Discussion

This project stands to advance understanding of the factors that influence the sustainment of practice changes introduced through evidence-informed practice change interventions, and their associated sustainability. Findings will inform our understanding of the nature of the relationship of fidelity and adaptation to sustainment and sustainability, and afford insights into factors that influence the intra-organizational spread of practice changes introduced through complex interventions.

Identifying relevant concepts and factors for the sustainability of evidence-based practices within acute care contexts: a systematic review and theory analysis of selected sustainability frameworks

Background

There is growing recognition among healthcare professionals that the sustainability of evidence-based practices (EBPs) within different settings is variable and suboptimal. Understanding why a particular EBP might be sustained in one setting and not another remains unclear. Recent reviews illustrate the need to identify and analyze existing frameworks/models/theories (F/M/Ts) that focus solely on the sustainability of EBPs in specific healthcare settings, such as acute care, to illuminate key determinants and facilitate appropriate selection to guide practice and research.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review to extract sustainability frameworks. This involved using two available syntheses of the literature and a systematic search of four databases from January 2015 to July 2018: CINHAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ProQuest. We included studies published in English, and if they included sustainability F/M/Ts recommended for use in acute care or an unspecified healthcare organization/setting. F/M/Ts explicitly recommended for use in public health and or community settings were excluded. We then conducted a comparative analysis of F/M/Ts using a modified theory analysis approach, to understand the theoretical underpinnings of each F/M/T, their determinants and concepts hypothesized to influence the sustained use of EBPs within an acute care context.

Results

Of 2967 identified citations from the 2 available syntheses and the systematic review, 8 F/M/Ts met the inclusion criteria. We identified 37 core factors, of which 16 were recorded as common factors (occurring within 4 or more of the 8 included F/M/Ts). All factors grouped into 7 main themes: innovation, adopters, leadership and management, inner context, inner processes, outer context, and outcomes.

Conclusions

This systematic review is the first to include a comprehensive analysis of healthcare sustainability F/M/Ts for the sustained use of EBPs in acute care settings. Findings reveal insights into sustainability as a “process or ongoing stage of use” following initial implementation, suggesting this construct should be added to the definition of sustainability. Results provide a resource of available F/M/Ts and hypothesized factors to consider for acute care team members who are planning or currently implementing EBPs with the goal of improving patient outcomes. It also provides a basis for future research on sustainability in acute care.

Organizational learning in hospitals: A realist review

AIM

To establish a middle-range theory of organizational learning in hospitals.

DESIGN

A realist review of the literature, conducted according to established standards for realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses. Middle-range theory development was performed according to Smith and Liehr's recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Two comprehensive scientific databases and six discipline-focused databases spanning health care, life sciences, business, sociology, and psychology were searched from inception to 12 May 2016.

REVIEW METHODS

Citations meeting the inclusion criteria were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data extraction was guided by a focus on the contextual factors, mechanisms, and outcomes associated with organizational learning.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 2,332 citations, 147 of which were ultimately included in the review. The included citations were generally of high quality. Reviewed evidence indicates certain aspects of organizational context can be conducive to mechanisms of organizational learning, leading to a range of positive organizational outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This review updates and expands on a previous review of the literature on organizational learning in hospitals, refines the concept of organizational learning in hospitals, and provides a middle-range theory of organizational learning in hospitals.

IMPACT

This updated review provides a strong evidence base for future work on the topic of organizational learning in hospitals. The refined concept of organizational learning makes it possible to develop reliable, valid research instruments that better reflect of the full scope of organizational learning. Finally, the middle-range theory guides researchers and clinical leaders as they advance the science and practice of organizational learning.

Transferring skills in quality collaboratives focused on improving patient logistics

Background

A quality improvement collaborative, often used by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, is used to educate healthcare professionals and improve healthcare at the same time. However, no prior research has been done on the knowledge and skills healthcare professionals need to achieve improvements or the extent to which quality improvement collaboratives help enhance both knowledge and skills. Our research focused on quality improvement collaboratives aiming to improve patient logistics and tried to identify which knowledge and skills are required and to what extent these were enhanced during the QIC.

Methods

We defined skills important for logistic improvements in a three-phase Delphi study. Based on the Delphi results we made a questionnaire. We surveyed participants in a national quality improvement collaborative to assess the skills rated as 1) important, 2) available and 3) improved during the collaborative. At two sense-making meetings, experts reflected on our findings and hypothesized on how to improve (logistics) collaboratives.

Results

The Delphi study found 18 skills relevant for reducing patient access time and 21 for reducing throughput time. All skills retrieved from the Delphi study were scored as ‘important’ in the survey. Teams especially lacked soft skills connected to project and change management. Analytical skills increased the most, while more reflexive skills needed for the primary goal of the collaborative (reduce access and throughput times) increased modestly.

At two sense-making meetings, attendees suggested four improvements for a quality improvement collaborative: 1) shift the focus to project- and change management skills; 2) focus more on knowledge transfer to colleagues; 3) teach participants to adapt the taught principles to their own situations; and 4) foster intra-project reflexive learning to translate gained insights to other projects (inter-project learning).

Conclusions

Our findings seem to suggest that Quality collaboratives could benefit if more attention is paid to the transfer of ‘soft skills’ (e.g. change, project management and communication skills) and reflexive skills (e.g. adjusting logistics principles to specific situations and inter-project translation of experiences).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3051-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Factors associated with sustainability of 2 quality improvement programs after achieving early implementation success. A qualitative case study

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Sustainability of innovations is a relatively new concept in health care research and has become an issue of growing interest. The current study explored factors related to the sustainability of 2 multidisciplinary hospital-based programs 3 to 6 years after achieving early implementation success.

METHOD

An exploratory qualitative study was conducted into 2 implementation cases, an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program for colorectal surgery and a short-stay program for breast cancer surgery. Semistructured interviews were held with key persons involved in the care process in 14 hospitals from both cases minimally 3 years after the implementation, between March 2012 and May 2013. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to direct the development of the interview guide, during data collection and during analysis. A directed content analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 21 interviews with 26 individuals were held, 18 regarding the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery case and 8 regarding the short-stay program case. Respondents mentioned the following factors associated with sustainability of the programs: modification and adaptability of the program, cost-effectiveness, institutionalization into existing systems, short communication lines within the multidisciplinary team, an innovative culture, benefits for patients, cosmopolitanism, the existence of external policies and incentives, trust and belief in the program, and spread of the program to other settings. Two factors are not covered by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, ie, modification of the program over the years and spread of the program to other contexts.

CONCLUSIONS

The factors associated with sustainability put forward in both cases were largely the same. Leadership and the implementation project were not mentioned as having influenced the long-term sustainability of the benefits achieved. Sustainability of the innovations is influenced by determinants stemming from all ecological levels of the health care system and demands continuous effort in the postimplementation phase.

How guiding coalitions promote positive culture change in hospitals: a longitudinal mixed methods interventional study

Background

Quality collaboratives are widely endorsed as a potentially effective method for translating and spreading best practices for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care. Nevertheless, hospital success in improving performance through participation in collaboratives varies markedly. We sought to understand what distinguished hospitals that succeeded in shifting culture and reducing 30-day risk-standardised mortality rate (RSMR) after AMI through their participation in the Leadership Saves Lives (LSL) collaborative.

Procedures

We conducted a longitudinal, mixed methods intervention study of 10 hospitals over a 2-year period; data included surveys of 223 individuals (response rates 83%–94% depending on wave) and 393 in-depth interviews with clinical and management staff most engaged with the LSL intervention in the 10 hospitals. We measured change in culture and RSMR, and key aspects of working related to team membership, turnover, level of participation and approaches to conflict management.

Main findings

The six hospitals that experienced substantial culture change and greater reductions in RSMR demonstrated distinctions in: (1) effective inclusion of staff from different disciplines and levels in the organisational hierarchy in the team guiding improvement efforts (referred to as the ‘guiding coalition’ in each hospital); (2) authentic participation in the work of the guiding coalition; and (3) distinct patterns of managing conflict. Guiding coalition size and turnover were not associated with success (p values>0.05). In the six hospitals that experienced substantial positive culture change, staff indicated that the LSL learnings were already being applied to other improvement efforts.

Principal conclusions

Hospitals that were most successful in a national quality collaborative to shift hospital culture and reduce RSMR showed distinct patterns in membership diversity, authentic participation and capacity for conflict management.

Leadership research in healthcare: A realist review

Being largely considered a human right, healthcare needs leaders who are able to make choices and to set directions. Following the recommendations expressed by Gilmartin and D'Aunno's review and roadmap compiled in 2008, today, it is important to acknowledge researchers' contributions to outline this landscape. The realist review of 77 publications answered questions such as “what works, for whom, and in which circumstances” highlighting: the effectiveness and acceptance of transformational and collaborative approaches; professionalism, expertise, and good task delegation within operational teams; distributed leadership, relationships, and social responsibility at a systemic level. The relevancy and need of leadership development programs, framed within a wider strategy, emerged. Nonetheless, gaps still exist and require further investigation: particular needs in public vs. private contexts; professionals' and women's differentiating characters; generational gaps; associations between leadership and recruitment HR practices research; how (and if) leaders (should) influence the organizational culture and values; and developing countries specific challenges. Also, a greater proportion of relevant findings should be drawn by empirical and more rigorous studies. Finally, a major attention could be paid to interactions happening at the team, organizational, and systemic level among different leaders and among leaders, followers and external actors.

An organizational perspective on the long-term sustainability of a nursing best practice guidelines program: a case study

BACKGROUND

Many healthcare innovations are not sustained over the long term, wasting costly implementation efforts and often desperately-needed initial improvements. Although there have been advances in knowledge about innovation implementation, there has been considerably less attention focused on understanding what happens following the early stages of change. Research is needed to determine how to improve the 'staying power' of healthcare innovations. As almost no empirical knowledge exists about innovation sustainability in nursing, the purpose of our study was to understand how a nursing best practice guidelines (BPG) program was sustained over a long-term period in an acute healthcare centre.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative descriptive case study to examine the program's sustainability at the nursing department level of the organization. The organization was a large, urban, multi-site acute care centre in Canada. The patient safety-oriented BPG program, initiated in 2004, consisted of an organization-wide implementation of three BPGs: falls prevention, pressure ulcer prevention, and pain management. Data were collected eight years following program initiation through 14 key informant interviews, document reviews, and observations. We developed a framework for the sustainability of healthcare innovations to guide data collection and content analysis.

RESULTS

Program sustainability entailed a combination of three essential characteristics: benefits, institutionalization, and development. A constellation of 11 factors most influenced the long-term sustainability of the program. These factors were innovation-, context-, leadership-, and process-related. Three key interactions between factors influencing program sustainability and characteristics of program sustainability accounted for how the program had been sustained. These interactions were between: leadership commitment and benefits; complementarity of leadership actions and both institutionalization and development; and a reflection-and-course-correction strategy and development.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings indicate that the successful initial implementation of an organizational program does not automatically lead to longer-term program sustainability. The persistent, complementary, and aligned actions of committed leaders, in a variety of roles across a health centre department, seem necessary. Organizational leaders should consider a broad conceptualization of sustainability that extends beyond program institutionalization and/or program benefits. The development of an organizational program may be necessary for its long-term survival.

The mutual shaping of governance and regulation of quality and safety in Dutch healthcare

Developing the concepts of governance and regulation is path dependent: working with the complexity of governance and regulation shapes and reshapes both their meaning and form. We conducted a case study on governance and regulation of quality and safety in Dutch hospitals to reveal these processes. We found that governance was given meaning in several phases, ranging from a focus on institutional design (e.g. corporate governance) through coping with incidents and using quality measurements, to prospective risk management. Governance changed incrementally in form and practice. We also saw that governance and regulation are intertwined; regulation shapes governance and is simultaneously shaped by changes in the meaning of governance. Insight into these processes is important to better understand what is defined as “good governance” and “good regulation” in a certain context. Understanding the mutual development of these concepts and practices reveals potential pathways to continuous shaping of good governance.

Post-disaster psychosocial support and quality improvement: A conceptual framework for understanding and improving the quality of psychosocial support programs

This article is original in that it addresses post-disaster psychosocial support programs from a quality-improvement perspective, not from the traditional viewpoint of mental health services. Based on a combination of renowned quality models, a framework is sketched that offers chances to better understand and optimize the quality of post-disaster psychosocial service delivery. The quality is reflected in the program's structure, process, and outcome. Moreover, quality can be expressed in scores per criterion (i.e. need centeredness, effectiveness, safety, timeliness, efficiency, and equity) that are proposed to be related to the "attitude" (more passive or active) toward affected people. When quality and attitude are combined in a 2-D parabolic model, psychosocial support is preferably found in the middle of the attitude-axis (high quality); extremely passive or active positions are to be avoided (low quality). Well-timed assessments of structure, process, and outcome aspects, and associations between them, will help planners, providers, and evaluators understand if the optimum is reached, as well as provide guidance for quality improvement.

Quality improvement collaboratives and the wisdom of crowds: spread explained by perceived success at group level

Background

Many studies have been conducted to evaluate the impact of quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) on the quality of healthcare. This article addresses an underexplored topic, namely the use of QICs as ‘intentional spread strategy.’ Its objective is to predict the dissemination of projects within hospitals participating in a change programme based on several QICs. We tested whether the average project success at QIC level (based on opinions of individual project team leaders) explains the dissemination of projects one year later.

Findings

After one year, 148 project team leaders of 16 hospitals participating in the two-year programme were asked to rate the success of their improvement project on a scale from 1 to 10. At the end of the second year, the programme coordinator of each hospital provided information on the second-year dissemination. Average success scores and dissemination statistics were calculated for each QIC (N = 12). The non-parametric correlation between team leader judgment and dissemination rate at QIC level is 0.73 (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

Previous work, focusing on the team and hospital level, showed which factors contributed to local success stories. It also illustrated how successes play a role in dissemination processes within programme hospitals. The current study suggests that we cannot ignore the extent to which the dissemination potential of individual projects is defined by their QIC. Aggregated team leader judgments at the QIC level might predict the future dissemination in participating organizations. The findings, however, need to be replicated in larger, independent samples.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0091-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Primary care staff perspectives on a virtual learning collaborative to support medical home implementation

BACKGROUND

Many organizations rely on quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) to facilitate Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) implementation, and there is a trend toward conducting QIC activities virtually to reduce costs and expand their reach. However, the evidence base for QICs is limited; questions remain about how QICs operate, why they succeed or fail, and how they are experienced by participants.

OBJECTIVE

We surveyed participants in an innovative Virtual Collaborative (VC) designed to support PCMH implementation within one Veterans Integrated Service Network, to understand why and for whom the VC was more/less effective and identify opportunities for improvement.

DESIGN

This anonymous online survey was designed to assess participants' views on the VC's usefulness, impact, and acceptability, and to explore variations by role, practice setting, prior training, and overall engagement in VC activities.

PARTICIPANTS

Respondents were 353 primary care staff, including providers, nurses, and support staff.

MEASURES/APPROACH

The survey comprised 32 structured and three free-response items. Structured items assessed participation in and perceived usefulness of VC activities; perceived acceptability of the training format; overall perceived impact; and basic demographics. Responses were dichotomized and compared using Chi-square tests. Free-response items inviting constructive criticism of the VC were coded and summarized to identify themes and illustrative quotes.

RESULTS

The VC most benefited respondents with prior PCMH training and those who fully participated in VC activities. Respondents especially valued the opportunity to share experiences with other teams. Non-providers and those new to PCMH felt learning content did not meet their needs. Reported barriers to full participation included staffing constraints, insufficient and/or unprotected time, and inadequate leadership support.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study offers practical lessons for others considering a virtual collaborative model for PCMH spread. Findings contribute to the evidence base for QICs overall and virtual QICs in particular, highlighting the value of seeking input from "the trenches."

The governance of quality management in dutch health care: new developments and strategic challenges

This article gives a brief sketch of quality management in Dutch health care. Our focus is upon the governance of guideline development and quality measurement. Governance is conceptualized as the structure and process of steering of quality management. The governance structure of guideline development in the Netherlands can be conceptualized as a network without central coordination. Much depends upon the self-initiative of stakeholders. A similar picture can be found in quality measurement. Special attention is given to the development of care standards for chronic disease. Care standards have a broader scope than guidelines and take an explicit patient perspective. They not only contain evidence-based and up-to-date guidelines for the care pathway but also contain standards for self-management. Furthermore, they comprise a set of indicators for measuring the quality of care of the entire pathway covered by the standard. The final part of the article discusses the mission, tasks and strategic challenges of the newly established National Health Care Institute (Zorginstituut Nederland), which is scheduled to be operative in 2013.

Development and validation of an index to assess hospital quality management systems

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop and validate an index to assess the implementation of quality management systems (QMSs) in European countries.

Design

Questionnaire development was facilitated through expert opinion, literature review and earlier empirical research. A cross-sectional online survey utilizing the questionnaire was undertaken between May 2011 and February 2012. We used psychometric methods to explore the factor structure, reliability and validity of the instrument.

Setting and participants

As part of the Deepening our Understanding of Quality improvement in Europe (DUQuE) project, we invited a random sample of 188 hospitals in 7 countries. The quality managers of these hospitals were the main respondents.

Main Outcome Measure

The extent of implementation of QMSs.

Results

Factor analysis yielded nine scales, which were combined to build the Quality Management Systems Index. Cronbach's reliability coefficients were satisfactory (ranging from 0.72 to 0.82) for eight scales and low for one scale (0.48). Corrected item-total correlations provided adequate evidence of factor homogeneity. Inter-scale correlations showed that every factor was related, but also distinct, and added to the index. Construct validity testing showed that the index was related to recent measures of quality. Participating hospitals attained a mean value of 19.7 (standard deviation of 4.7) on the index that theoretically ranged from 0 to 27.

Conclusion

Assessing QMSs across Europe has the potential to help policy-makers and other stakeholders to compare hospitals and focus on the most important areas for improvement.

The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change

BACKGROUND

Despite growth in implementation research, limited scientific attention has focused on understanding and improving sustainability of health interventions. Models of sustainability have been evolving to reflect challenges in the fit between intervention and context.

DISCUSSION

We examine the development of concepts of sustainability, and respond to two frequent assumptions -'voltage drop,' whereby interventions are expected to yield lower benefits as they move from efficacy to effectiveness to implementation and sustainability, and 'program drift,' whereby deviation from manualized protocols is assumed to decrease benefit. We posit that these assumptions limit opportunities to improve care, and instead argue for understanding the changing context of healthcare to continuously refine and improve interventions as they are sustained. Sustainability has evolved from being considered as the endgame of a translational research process to a suggested 'adaptation phase' that integrates and institutionalizes interventions within local organizational and cultural contexts. These recent approaches locate sustainability in the implementation phase of knowledge transfer, but still do not address intervention improvement as a central theme. We propose a Dynamic Sustainability Framework that involves: continued learning and problem solving, ongoing adaptation of interventions with a primary focus on fit between interventions and multi-level contexts, and expectations for ongoing improvement as opposed to diminishing outcomes over time.

SUMMARY

A Dynamic Sustainability Framework provides a foundation for research, policy and practice that supports development and testing of falsifiable hypotheses and continued learning to advance the implementation, transportability and impact of health services research.

Sustainability of healthcare innovations (SUSHI): long term effects of two implemented surgical care programmes (protocol)

Background

Two healthcare innovations were successfully implemented using different implementation strategies. First, a Short Stay Programme for breast cancer surgery (MaDO) was implemented in four early adopter hospitals, using a hospital-tailored implementation strategy. Second, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme for colonic surgery was implemented in 33 Dutch hospitals, using a generic breakthrough implementation strategy. Both strategies resulted in a shorter hospital length of stay without a decrease in quality of care. Currently, it is unclear to what extent these innovative programmes and their results have been sustained three to five years following implementation. The aim of the sustainability of healthcare innovations (SUSHI) study is to analyse sustainability and its determinants using two implementation cases.

Methods

This observational study uses a mixed methods approach. The study will be performed in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands, from November 2010. For both implementation cases, the programme aspects and the effects will be evaluated by means of a follow-up measurement in 160 patients who underwent breast cancer surgery and 300 patients who underwent colonic surgery. A policy cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective will be performed prospectively for the Short Stay Programme for breast cancer surgery in 160 patients. To study determinants of sustainability key professionals in the multidisciplinary care processes and implementation change agents will be interviewed using semi-structured interviews.

Discussion

The concept of sustainability is not commonly studied in implementation science. The SUSHI study will provide insight in to what extent the short-term implementation benefits have been maintained and in the determinants of long-term continuation of programme activities.

Spreading a medication administration intervention organizationwide in six hospitals

BACKGROUND

Six hospitals from the San Francisco Bay Area participated in a 12-month quality improvement project conducted by the Integrated Nurse Leadership Program (INLP). A quality improvement intervention that focused on improving medication administration accuracy was spread from two pilot units to all inpatient units in the hospitals.

METHODS

INLP developed a 12-month curriculum, presented in a combination of off-site training sessions and hospital-based training and consultant-led meetings, to teach clinicians the key skills needed to drive organizationwide change. Each hospital established a nurse-led project team, as well as unit teams to address six safety processes designed to improve medication administration accuracy: compare medication to the medication administration record; keep medication labeled throughout; check two patient identifications; explain drug to patient (if applicable); chart immediately after administration; and protect process from distractions and interruptions.

RESULTS

From baseline until one year after project completion, the six hospitals improved their medication accuracy rates, on average, from 83.4% to 98.0% in the spread units. The spread units also improved safety processes overall from 83.1% to 97.2%. During the same time, the initial pilot units also continued to improve accuracy from 94.0% to 96.8% and safety processes overall from 95.3% to 97.2%.

CONCLUSION

With thoughtful planning, engaging those doing the work early and focusing on the "human side of change" along with technical knowledge of improvement methodologies, organizations can spread initiatives enterprisewide. This program required significant training of frontline workers in problem-solving skills, leading change, team management, data tracking, and communication.

The sustainability of new programs and innovations: a review of the empirical literature and recommendations for future research

BACKGROUND

The introduction of evidence-based programs and practices into healthcare settings has been the subject of an increasing amount of research in recent years. While a number of studies have examined initial implementation efforts, less research has been conducted to determine what happens beyond that point. There is increasing recognition that the extent to which new programs are sustained is influenced by many different factors and that more needs to be known about just what these factors are and how they interact. To understand the current state of the research literature on sustainability, our team took stock of what is currently known in this area and identified areas in which further research would be particularly helpful. This paper reviews the methods that have been used, the types of outcomes that have been measured and reported, findings from studies that reported long-term implementation outcomes, and factors that have been identified as potential influences on the sustained use of new practices, programs, or interventions. We conclude with recommendations and considerations for future research.

METHODS

Two coders identified 125 studies on sustainability that met eligibility criteria. An initial coding scheme was developed based on constructs identified in previous literature on implementation. Additional codes were generated deductively. Related constructs among factors were identified by consensus and collapsed under the general categories. Studies that described the extent to which programs or innovations were sustained were also categorized and summarized.

RESULTS

Although "sustainability" was the term most commonly used in the literature to refer to what happened after initial implementation, not all the studies that were reviewed actually presented working definitions of the term. Most study designs were retrospective and naturalistic. Approximately half of the studies relied on self-reports to assess sustainability or elements that influence sustainability. Approximately half employed quantitative methodologies, and the remainder employed qualitative or mixed methodologies. Few studies that investigated sustainability outcomes employed rigorous methods of evaluation (e.g., objective evaluation, judgement of implementation quality or fidelity). Among those that did, a small number reported full sustainment or high fidelity. Very little research has examined the extent, nature, or impact of adaptations to the interventions or programs once implemented. Influences on sustainability included organizational context, capacity, processes, and factors related to the new program or practice themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

Clearer definitions and research that is guided by the conceptual literature on sustainability are critical to the development of the research in the area. Further efforts to characterize the phenomenon and the factors that influence it will enhance the quality of future research. Careful consideration must also be given to interactions among influences at multiple levels, as well as issues such as fidelity, modification, and changes in implementation over time. While prospective and experimental designs are needed, there is also an important role for qualitative research in efforts to understand the phenomenon, refine hypotheses, and develop strategies to promote sustainment.

Overview of the quality assurance movement in health care

This chapter aims to describe the origin and current status of quality assurance (QA) in health care and to provide a background of similar developments in other industries, which have provided a major impetus for QA initiatives in health care. The interest in quality and safety in the health care sector has rapidly risen over the past decade. Without important lessons learnt from other industries, the interest and obtained improvements would have been far less fast. Knowledge on basic principles and challenges faced by other industries like the airline, car, and nuclear energy industry, that drove quality improvement projects, is of major relevance to understand the evolutions taking place in health care. To fully appreciate the QA movement, and design or implement quality improvement projects, its basic principles need to be understood. This chapter aims to give insights in basic principles underlying QA, and to discuss historical lessons that have been learnt from other industries. Furthermore, it discusses how to implement and assure a sustainable QA program.