What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory
Abstract Background A computerised, multifaceted quality improvement (QI) intervention for cardiovascular disease (CVD) management in Australian primary healthcare was evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled trial. The intervention was associated with improved CVD risk factor screening but ther...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2018-11-01
|
| Series: | Implementation Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-018-0830-x |
| _version_ | 1818992627647774720 |
|---|---|
| author | Bindu Patel Tim Usherwood Mark Harris Anushka Patel Kathryn Panaretto Nicholas Zwar David Peiris |
| author_facet | Bindu Patel Tim Usherwood Mark Harris Anushka Patel Kathryn Panaretto Nicholas Zwar David Peiris |
| author_sort | Bindu Patel |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background A computerised, multifaceted quality improvement (QI) intervention for cardiovascular disease (CVD) management in Australian primary healthcare was evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled trial. The intervention was associated with improved CVD risk factor screening but there was no improvement in prescribing rates of guideline-recommended medicines. The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation to identify and explain the underlying mechanisms by which the intervention did and did not have an impact. Methods/design Normalisation process theory (NPT) was used to understand factors that supported or constrained normalisation of the intervention into routine practice. A case study design was used in which six of the 30 participating intervention sites were purposively sampled to obtain a mix of size, governance, structure and performance. Multiple data sources were drawn on including trial outcome data, surveys of job satisfaction and team climate (68 staff) and in-depth interviews (19 staff). Data were primarily analysed within cases and compared with quantitative findings in other trial intervention and usual care sites. Results We found a complex interaction between implementation processes and several contextual factors affecting uptake of the intervention. There was no clear association between team climate, job satisfaction and intervention outcomes. There were four spheres of influence that appeared to enhance or detract from normalisation of the intervention: organisational mission and history (e.g. strategic investment to promote a QI culture enhanced cognitive participation), leadership (e.g. ability to energise or demotivate others influenced coherence), team environment (e.g. synergistic activities of team members with different skill sets influenced collective action) and technical integrity of the intervention (e.g. tools that slowed computer systems limited reflective action). Discussion Use of NPT helped explain how certain contextual factors influence the work that is done by individuals and teams when implementing a novel intervention. Although these factors do not necessarily distil into a recipe for successful uptake, they may assist system planners, intervention developers, and health professionals to better understand the trajectory that primary health care services may take when developing and engaging with QI interventions. Trial registration ACTRN 12611000478910. Registered 08 May 2011. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-20T20:29:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8d60b62ce32c4ababbad8b62b92e4e2a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1748-5908 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-20T20:29:10Z |
| publishDate | 2018-11-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Implementation Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-8d60b62ce32c4ababbad8b62b92e4e2a2022-12-21T19:27:23ZengBMCImplementation Science1748-59082018-11-0113111510.1186/s13012-018-0830-xWhat drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theoryBindu Patel0Tim Usherwood1Mark Harris2Anushka Patel3Kathryn Panaretto4Nicholas Zwar5David Peiris6The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South WalesUniversity of SydneyUniversity of New South WalesThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South WalesUniversity of QueenslandUniversity of New South WalesThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South WalesAbstract Background A computerised, multifaceted quality improvement (QI) intervention for cardiovascular disease (CVD) management in Australian primary healthcare was evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled trial. The intervention was associated with improved CVD risk factor screening but there was no improvement in prescribing rates of guideline-recommended medicines. The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation to identify and explain the underlying mechanisms by which the intervention did and did not have an impact. Methods/design Normalisation process theory (NPT) was used to understand factors that supported or constrained normalisation of the intervention into routine practice. A case study design was used in which six of the 30 participating intervention sites were purposively sampled to obtain a mix of size, governance, structure and performance. Multiple data sources were drawn on including trial outcome data, surveys of job satisfaction and team climate (68 staff) and in-depth interviews (19 staff). Data were primarily analysed within cases and compared with quantitative findings in other trial intervention and usual care sites. Results We found a complex interaction between implementation processes and several contextual factors affecting uptake of the intervention. There was no clear association between team climate, job satisfaction and intervention outcomes. There were four spheres of influence that appeared to enhance or detract from normalisation of the intervention: organisational mission and history (e.g. strategic investment to promote a QI culture enhanced cognitive participation), leadership (e.g. ability to energise or demotivate others influenced coherence), team environment (e.g. synergistic activities of team members with different skill sets influenced collective action) and technical integrity of the intervention (e.g. tools that slowed computer systems limited reflective action). Discussion Use of NPT helped explain how certain contextual factors influence the work that is done by individuals and teams when implementing a novel intervention. Although these factors do not necessarily distil into a recipe for successful uptake, they may assist system planners, intervention developers, and health professionals to better understand the trajectory that primary health care services may take when developing and engaging with QI interventions. Trial registration ACTRN 12611000478910. Registered 08 May 2011.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-018-0830-xQuality improvementHealth information technologyPrimary healthcareHealth serviceNormalisation process theoryProcess evaluation |
| spellingShingle | Bindu Patel Tim Usherwood Mark Harris Anushka Patel Kathryn Panaretto Nicholas Zwar David Peiris What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory Implementation Science Quality improvement Health information technology Primary healthcare Health service Normalisation process theory Process evaluation |
| title | What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory |
| title_full | What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory |
| title_fullStr | What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory |
| title_full_unstemmed | What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory |
| title_short | What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory |
| title_sort | what drives adoption of a computerised multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings a mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory |
| topic | Quality improvement Health information technology Primary healthcare Health service Normalisation process theory Process evaluation |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-018-0830-x |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT bindupatel whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory AT timusherwood whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory AT markharris whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory AT anushkapatel whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory AT kathrynpanaretto whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory AT nicholaszwar whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory AT davidpeiris whatdrivesadoptionofacomputerisedmultifacetedqualityimprovementinterventionforcardiovasculardiseasemanagementinprimaryhealthcaresettingsamixedmethodsanalysisusingnormalisationprocesstheory |