1
|
O'Leary MC, Hassmiller Lich K, Reuland DS, Brenner AT, Moore AA, Ratner S, Birken SA, Wheeler SB. Optimizing process flow diagrams to guide implementation of a colorectal cancer screening intervention in new settings. Cancer Causes Control 2023; 34:89-98. [PMID: 37731072 PMCID: PMC10689519 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-023-01769-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The goal of this study was to assess acceptability of using process flow diagrams (or process maps) depicting a previously implemented evidence-based intervention (EBI) to inform the implementation of similar interventions in new settings. METHODS We developed three different versions of process maps, each visualizing the implementation of the same multicomponent colorectal cancer (CRC) screening EBI in community health centers but including varying levels of detail about how it was implemented. Interviews with community health professionals and practitioners at other sites not affiliated with this intervention were conducted. We assessed their preferences related to the map designs, their potential utility for guiding EBI implementation, and the feasibility of implementing a similar intervention in their local setting given the information available in the process maps. RESULTS Eleven community health representatives were interviewed. Participants were able to understand how the intervention was implemented and engage in discussions around the feasibility of implementing this type of complex intervention in their local system. Potential uses of the maps for supporting implementation included staff training, role delineation, monitoring and quality control, and adapting the components and implementation activities of the existing intervention. CONCLUSION Process maps can potentially support decision-making about the adoption, implementation, and adaptation of existing EBIs in new contexts. Given the complexities involved in deciding whether and how to implement EBIs, these diagrams serve as visual, easily understood tools to inform potential future adopters of the EBI about the activities, resources, and staffing needed for implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meghan C O'Leary
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
| | - Kristen Hassmiller Lich
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Daniel S Reuland
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Alison T Brenner
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Alexis A Moore
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Shana Ratner
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Sarah A Birken
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
- Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Stephanie B Wheeler
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Casanova NL, LeClair AM, Xiao V, Mullikin KR, Lemon SC, Freund KM, Haas JS, Freedman RA, Battaglia TA. Development of a workflow process mapping protocol to inform the implementation of regional patient navigation programs in breast oncology. Cancer 2022; 128 Suppl 13:2649-2658. [PMID: 35699611 PMCID: PMC9201987 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33944] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2021] [Revised: 08/06/2021] [Accepted: 08/20/2021] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementing city-wide patient navigation processes that support patients across the continuum of cancer care is impeded by a lack of standardized tools to integrate workflows and reduce gaps in care. The authors present an actionable workflow process mapping protocol for navigation process planning and improvement based on methods developed for the Translating Research Into Practice study. METHODS Key stakeholders at each study site were identified through existing community partnerships, and data on each site's navigation processes were collected using mixed methods through a series of team meetings. The authors used Health Quality Ontario's Quality Improvement Guide, service design principles, and key stakeholder input to map the collected data onto a template structured according to the case-management model. RESULTS Data collection and process mapping exercises resulted in a 10-step protocol that includes: 1) workflow mapping procedures to guide data collection on the series of activities performed by health care personnel that comprise a patient's navigation experience, 2) a site survey to assess program characteristics, 3) a semistructured interview guide to assess care coordination workflows, 4) a site-level swim lane workflow process mapping template, and 5) a regional high-level process mapping template to aggregate data from multiple site-level process maps. CONCLUSIONS This iterative, participatory approach to data collection and process mapping can be used by improvement teams to streamline care coordination, ultimately improving the design and delivery of an evidence-based navigation model that spans multiple treatment modalities and multiple health systems in a metropolitan area. This protocol is presented as an actionable toolkit so the work may be replicated to support other quality-improvement initiatives and efforts to design truly patient-centered breast cancer treatment experiences. LAY SUMMARY Evidence-based patient navigation in breast cancer care requires the integration of services through each phase of cancer treatment. The Translating Research Into Practice study aims to implement patient navigation for patients with breast cancer who are at risk for delays and are seeking care across 6 health systems in Boston, Massachusetts. The authors designed a 10-step protocol outlining procedures and tools that support a systematic assessment for health systems that want to implement breast cancer patient navigation services for patients who are at risk for treatment delays.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole L Casanova
- University of Washington School of Public Health, 1959 NE Pacific St., Seattle, WA, United States of America
| | - Amy M LeClair
- Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center,800 Washington Street., Boston, MA, United States of America
| | - Victoria Xiao
- Boston Medical Center, 801 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, MA, United States of America
| | - Katelyn R Mullikin
- Boston Medical Center, 801 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, MA, United States of America
| | - Stephenie C Lemon
- University of Massachusetts Medical School, 368 Plantation St., Worcester MA, United States of America
| | - Karen M Freund
- Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center,800 Washington Street., Boston, MA, United States of America
| | - Jennifer S Haas
- Massachusetts General Hospital, 100 Cambridge St., Suite 1600, Boston, MA, United States of America
| | - Rachel A Freedman
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave., Boston, MA, United States of America
| | - Tracy A Battaglia
- Boston Medical Center, 801 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, MA, United States of America,Boston University School of Medicine, 801 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, MA, United States of America
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Process mapping (PM) supports better understanding of complex systems and adaptation of improvement interventions to their local context. However, there is little research on its use in healthcare. This study (i) proposes a conceptual framework outlining quality criteria to guide the effective implementation, evaluation and reporting of PM in healthcare; (ii) reviews published PM cases to identify context and quality of PM application, and the reported benefits of using PM in healthcare. METHODS We developed the conceptual framework by reviewing methodological guidance on PM and empirical literature on its use in healthcare improvement interventions. We conducted a systematic review of empirical literature using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. Inclusion criteria were: full text empirical study; describing the process through which PM has been applied in a healthcare setting; published in English. Databases searched are: Medline, Embase, HMIC-Health Management Information Consortium, CINAHL-Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus. Two independent reviewers extracted and analysed data. Each manuscript underwent line by line coding. The conceptual framework was used to evaluate adherence of empirical studies to the identified PM quality criteria. Context in which PM is used and benefits of using PM were coded using an inductive thematic analysis approach. RESULTS The framework outlines quality criteria for each PM phase: (i) preparation, planning and process identification, (ii) data and information gathering, (iii) process map generation, (iv) analysis, (v) taking it forward. PM is used in a variety of settings and approaches to improvement. None of the reviewed studies (N = 105) met all ten quality criteria; 7% were compliant with 8/10 or 9/10 criteria. 45% of studies reported that PM was generated through multi-professional meetings and 15% reported patient involvement. Studies highlighted the value of PM in navigating the complexity characterising healthcare improvement interventions. CONCLUSION The full potential of PM is inhibited by variance in reporting and poor adherence to underpinning principles. Greater rigour in the application of the method is required. We encourage the use and further development of the proposed framework to support training, application and reporting of PM. TRIAL REGISTRATION Prospero ID: CRD42017082140.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grazia Antonacci
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) Northwest London, London, UK
- Business School, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Innovation (CHEPI), Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Laura Lennox
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) Northwest London, London, UK
| | - James Barlow
- Business School, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Innovation (CHEPI), Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Liz Evans
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Northwest London, London, UK
| | - Julie Reed
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Northwest London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Weir NM, Newham R, Bennie M. A literature review of human factors and ergonomics within the pharmacy dispensing process. Res Social Adm Pharm 2019; 16:637-645. [PMID: 31444123 DOI: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2019.08.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2019] [Revised: 08/07/2019] [Accepted: 08/11/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Within healthcare, Human Factors explores the fit between people and their working environment to improve safety, performance and wellbeing. The pharmacy setting is an area of particular interest considering the high-risk nature of the work activities in relation to dispensing errors. Internationally, the pharmacy setting is experiencing significant workforce changes, including the introduction of pharmacy technicians performing accuracy checks, and the adoption of novel technologies such as automated dispensing. OBJECTIVE A literature review was conducted to identify studies which have explored the pharmacy dispensing process from a Human Factors perspective. METHODS The databases Medline, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched on the 27th of November 2018. All study designs were eligible for inclusion from community and hospital settings. Key study findings were extracted and reported using a descriptive narrative synthesis method. RESULTS Thirty-two studies were identified, with most published from 2010 onwards. The review identified that a myriad of aspects influence safety within the dispensing process; that the dispensing process is complex in nature and can be depicted in many different ways; and lastly, that deviations from intended practice appear commonplace. Most studies used two or more data collection sources, and various theories, models and frameworks were applied. Although the focus of all studies was within the wider domain of Human Factors, 14 studies did not explicitly refer to a Human Factors approach within the manuscript. CONCLUSIONS The complexity of the pharmacy dispensing setting suggests that adopting a Human Factors approach to explore this context is appropriate. Future Human Factors research should explore the implementation of new technology and services and focus on obtaining empirical evidence that adopting a Human Factors approach improves safety and/or efficiency within pharmacy practice. Clear guidance on how to apply the range of Human Factors approaches would help support such research and facilitate the development of sound theory.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie M Weir
- Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Robertson Trust Wing, 161 Cathedral St, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, G4 0RE, United Kingdom.
| | - Rosemary Newham
- Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Robertson Trust Wing, 161 Cathedral St, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, G4 0RE, United Kingdom.
| | - Marion Bennie
- Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Robertson Trust Wing, 161 Cathedral St, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, G4 0RE, United Kingdom; Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Gyle Square, 1 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 9EB, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|