Stakeholder engagement from problem analysis to implementation strategies for a patient-reported experience measure in disability care: A qualitative study on the process and experiences

Engaging critically: exploring the varying roles of lived experience advisors in an implementation science study on management of opioid prescribing

Involvement of individuals with lived experience, also called "patient partners", is a key element within implementation science, the study of how to put evidence into practice. While conducting a 4-year implementation study focused on improving physician management of opioid prescribing, our research team worked closely with Lived Experience Advisors (LEAs). LEAs were involved throughout the study, including developing patient-facing recruitment material, informing the analysis of results, and as a regular reminder of the real-world impact of this work. However, through regular critical reflection, we acknowledged that we were still uncertain how to articulate the impact of LEA involvement. As a team, we continually discussed why and how people with lived experience were involved in this study. We probed ill-defined concepts such as "patient perspective", which was particularly complex for a study focused on changing physician behaviour with indirect impact on patients. This critical reflection strengthened trust and rapport between team members (characteristics deemed essential to meaningful patient involvement), while underscoring the value of including concerted time to explore the muddier aspects of engagement. In short, patient engagement did not proceed as smoothly as planned. We advocate that "best practices" in the engagement of people with lived experience include regularly setting aside time outside of practical study tasks to interrogate complex aspects of patient engagement, including reflecting on how and why individuals with lived experience are involved.

Experiences of a virtual day program for adolescents with eating disorders: a qualitative analysis of benefits and barriers

BACKGROUND

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a detrimental impact to the symptoms and treatment of eating disorders, causing an increase in medical admissions and visits. Day treatment programs (DTPs), often used to bridge the gap between inpatient and outpatient treatment, were converted to online formats. This study aims to explore the impact of the transition to virtual DTPs on eating disorder treatment from the perspective of adolescents, their caregivers, and program staff.

METHODS

Twelve participants (3 adolescents, 4 caregivers, 5 healthcare providers) in a virtual day treatment program were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were transcribed and managed with qualitative software NVivo 11.0. Conventional analysis was used to inductively identify pertinent themes related to patient, caregiver, and healthcare staff perceptions and experiences of the virtual day treatment. Summative content analysis provided counts of the barriers and benefits of virtual day treatment as identified by participants.

RESULTS

The majority of participants (10/12) had exposure to both virtual and in person settings, most participants (11/12) felt in-person day programs would be superior to virtual programs. Common limitations of the virtual format were feelings of isolation, less support from healthcare providers, parental burnout, and increased disordered eating. Common benefits were increased accessibility, parental involvement, improved communication with healthcare staff, and the ability for participants to be in their home environment and eat home food. Suggestions for improvement included designing a hybrid model of day treatment, increased family involvement, extending the day program to include dinners with family, and screening for patient appropriateness for the virtual setting.

CONCLUSION

This qualitative study suggests that there are many barriers to effective implementation of virtual day programs. However, the virtual DTP program offers increased accessibility to patients during a period of a health pandemic and to patients in rural/remote areas with limited treatment options. Suggestions provided by participants in this study, such as increased family involvement, frequency of in person check-ins and increased number of meals supported by the program, may help to improve outcomes in virtual day treatment programs.

Implementation of a patient-reported experience measure in a Dutch disability care organization: A process evaluation of cocreated tailored strategies

INTRODUCTION

In 24/7 disability care facilities, patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are important to help healthcare professionals understand what matters to care users and to improve the quality of care. However, the successful implementation of a PREM is complex. In a Dutch disability care organization, stakeholders cocreated tailored implementation strategies aimed at improving the use and integration of a qualitative PREM. This study gives insights into the uptake and experiences with these cocreated implementation strategies and the perceived impact of the set of strategies.

METHODS

We performed a prospective process evaluation between February 2020 and February 2021. We collected data in three disability care facilities from 35 care users, 11 professionals, 3 facility managers and 4 organization representatives. Data collection included observations during kick-offs and learning goal meetings and several attendance checklists. We collected 133 questionnaires (Time 0 and Time 1). We conducted 35 individual semistructured interviews and an online focus group interview. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

The exposure to and adoption of strategies was between 76% and 100%. Participants were positive about tailoring the strategies to each facility. Implementation was hindered by challenges in care users' communication and COVID-19. The perceived impact referred to an improved understanding of the goal and added value of the PREM and better preparation and execution of the PREM. The impact of the set of strategies was mainly experienced on the micro level.

CONCLUSION

The uptake of the cocreated implementation strategies was acceptable. The participants valued the tailored approach, which enabled them to focus on facility-specific learning goals. Stakeholder engagement and co-created strategies may have strengthened the adoption of and experiences with the implementation.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

In this article, we present the process evaluation of implementation strategies for the integrated use of a PREM in disability care. A development group consisting of communication vulnerable care users, trainers and professionals developed the implementation strategies. The disability care organization was responsible for the planning and organization of the implementation process. During the process evaluation the end users, trainers, professionals and managers tailored the implementation strategies to their own settings and needs. Researchers observed this implementation process and interviewed the stakeholders about their experiences and the perceived impact.

Co-designing person-centred quality indicator implementation for primary care in Alberta: a consensus study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to contribute to developing practical guidance for implementing person-centred quality indicators (PC-QIs) for primary care in Alberta, Canada. As a first step in this process, we conducted stakeholder-guided prioritization of PC-QIs and implementation strategies. Stakeholder engagement is necessary to ensure PC-QI implementation is adapted to the context and local needs.

METHODS

We used an adapted nominal group technique (NGT) consensus process. Panelists were presented with 26 PC-QIs, and implementation strategies. Both PC-QIs and strategies were identified from our extensive previous engagement of patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, and quality improvement leaders. The NGT objectives were to: 1. Prioritize PC-QIs and implementation strategies; and 2. Facilitate the participation of diverse primary care stakeholders in Alberta, including patients, healthcare providers, and quality improvement staff. Panelists participated in three rounds of activities. In the first, panelists individually ranked and commented on the PC-QIs and strategies. The summarized results were discussed in the second-round face-to-face group meeting. For the last round, panelists provided their final individual rankings, informed by the group discussion. Finally, we conducted an evaluation of the consensus process from the panelists' perspectives.

RESULTS

Eleven primary care providers, patient partners, and quality improvement staff from across Alberta participated. The panelists prioritized the following PC-QIs: 'Patient and caregiver involvement in decisions about their care and treatment'; 'Trusting relationship with healthcare provider'; 'Health information technology to support person-centred care'; 'Co-designing care in partnership with communities'; and 'Overall experience'. Implementation strategies prioritized included: 'Develop partnerships'; 'Obtain quality improvement resources'; 'Needs assessment (stakeholders are engaged about their needs/priorities for person-centred measurement)'; 'Align measurement efforts'; and 'Engage champions'. Our evaluation suggests that panelists felt that the process was valuable for planning the implementation and obtaining feedback, that their input was valued, and that most would continue to collaborate with other stakeholders to implement the PC-QIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates the value of co-design and participatory approaches for engaging stakeholders in adapting PC-QI implementation for the primary care context in Alberta, Canada. Collaboration with stakeholders can promote buy-in for ongoing engagement and ensure implementation will lead to meaningful improvements that matter to patients and providers.

A Qualitative Force Field Analysis of Facilitators and Barriers to Evidence-Based Practice in Healthcare Using an Implementation Framework

Research has identified facilitators and barriers to implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs). Few studies have evaluated which factors persist among healthcare clinicians with extensive education and training on EBP implementation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine facilitators and barriers to EBP implementation across a national sample of specialty-prepared EBP mentors in healthcare settings. Healthcare clinicians participating in an immersive 5-day EBP knowledge and skill building program were invited to complete a follow-up survey 12 months later to report on implementation experiences. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided content analysis of responses. A force field analysis using Lewin’s change theory was used to assign numerical ‘weights’ to factors. Eighty-four individuals reported facilitators and barriers to implementation. The majority occurred within the inner setting of the CFIR model. Facilitators were strong leadership engagement (n = 15), positive EBP culture (n = 9), and resources (n = 4). Barriers included lack of resources (n = 21), poor leadership engagement (n = 19), implementation climate (n = 17), lack of relative priority (n = 12), and organizational characteristics (n = 9). Respondents also identified simultaneous facilitators and barriers within the process domain of the CFIR model. The construct of stakeholder engagement was a barrier when absent from the implementation process (n = 23), yet was a strong facilitator when present (n = 23). Implementation in healthcare settings appears most effective when conducted by an interprofessional team with strong leadership, resources, stakeholder engagement, and positive EBP culture. When these same factors are absent, they remain persistent barriers to implementation, even among specialty-trained healthcare clinicians.

The Implementation of Evidence-Informed Family Nursing Practices: A Scoping Review of Strategies, Contextual Determinants, and Outcomes

There is a lack of knowledge about the successful implementation of family nursing practices. This scoping review maps current knowledge about the implementation of evidence-informed family nursing practices across settings and populations. A systematic search (CINAHL, PubMed, Medline) identified 24 publications, published between 2010 and 2020. We found nurses' implementation experience to be one of disruption, learning, and moving to new ways of practicing. The implementation resulted in benefits to families and self but was marked by fluctuation and partial integration of evidence-informed family nursing practices into care delivery. Uptake was shaped by various contextual determinants, with barriers mainly at the team and organizational levels. We identified low-quality, tentative evidence that capacity-building strategies coupled with dissemination-educational strategies may enable family nursing practice skills and increase the quality of family care. More rigorous research is needed to build further knowledge about effective implementation. Future implementation endeavors should utilize the evolving knowledge base in family nursing and tailor implementation strategies to contextual barriers.

How to foster successful implementation of a patient reported experience measurement in the disability sector: an example of developing strategies in co-creation

BACKGROUND

The integrated uptake of patient-reported experience measures, using outcomes for the micro, meso and macro level, calls for a successful implementation process which depends on how stakeholders are involved in this process. Currently, the impact of stakeholders on strategies to improve the integrated use is rarely reported, and information about how stakeholders can be engaged, including care-users who are communication vulnerable, is limited. This study illustrates the impact of all stakeholders on developing tailored implementation strategies and provides insights into supportive conditions to involve care-users who are communication vulnerable.

METHODS

With the use of participatory action research, implementation strategies were co-created by care-users who are communication vulnerable (n = 8), professionals (n = 12), management (n = 6) and researchers (n = 5) over 9 months. Data collection consisted of audiotapes, reports, and researchers' notes. Conventional content analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The impact of care-users concerned the strategies' look and feel, understandability and relevance. Professionals influenced impact on how to use strategies and terminology. The impact of management was on showing the gap between policy and practice, and learning from previous improvement failures. Researchers showed impact on analysis, direction of strategy changes and translating academic and development experience into practice. The engagement of care-users who are communication vulnerable was supported, taking into account organisational issues and the presentation of information.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of all engaged stakeholders was identified over the different levels strategies focused on. Care-users who are communication vulnerable were valuable engaged in co-creation implementation strategies by equipping them to their needs and routines, which requires adaptation in communication, delimited meetings and a safe group environment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Reviewed by the Medical Ethics Committee of Zuyderland-Zuyd (METCZ20190006). NL7594 registred at https://www.trialregister.nl/ .