Search

Background: Although the literature has noted the positive effects of facilitation in implementation research, little is known about what facilitators do or how they increase adoption of a program. The purpose of this study was to understand internal facilitation activities in implementing a national safe patient handling program from the perspective of facility coordinators who implemented the program., Methods: Using a qualitative descriptive design, data were collected in five focus groups at two international Safe Patient Handling and Mobility Conferences. Participants were 38 facility coordinators implementing a safe patient handling program in the Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers throughout the United States. Data were analyzed using direct content analysis to gather descriptions of internal facilitation., Results: The internal facilitation process involved engaging multiple disciplines and levels of leadership for implementation. Fifty-four facilitation activities were identified, including five activities not currently listed in an existing taxonomy. Key characteristics and skills of facilitators included persistence, credibility and clinical experience, and leadership and project management experience. Themes were mapped onto an existing framework and taxonomy of facilitation activities., Linking Evidence to Action: Internal facilitation is both an implementation intervention and a process involving a wide range of activities. The findings provide an understanding of what internal facilitators are doing to support practice changes and the characteristics and skills of internal facilitators that are likely to result in long-term organizational change. Five recommendations for action address organizations, senior leaders, and internal facilitators., (© Published 2015. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Limited understanding and application of theory in implementation research contributes to variable effectiveness of implementation studies. Better understanding of direct experiences with theory could improve implementation research and the potency of interventions., Aims: This study was a conceptual exercise aimed at characterizing experiences with and applications of the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework., Methods: This was a structured, qualitative study involving document reviews and interviews used to answer the following overarching questions about nine implementation research centers: Why and how was PARIHS used? What strengths and weaknesses were identified for PARIHS?, Findings: PARIHS was being used for varied purposes, at varied levels, in varied ways, and to a varying extent within and across centers. Lack of implementation theory use in investigators' early years was common. Variability in the nature of theory use was attributable to characteristics of the centers, individual investigators, and features of PARIHS. Strengths and weaknesses of the PARIHS framework were identified., Linking Evidence to Action: The study provides information to researchers and theorists about the use of one well-known implementation framework. The information suggests areas for improvements in PARIHS as well as theory use in general, and should assist in the development of theory-based programs of research., (Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)