Search

OBJECTIVE: Prior to a multifaceted implementation strategy for a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice the expectations of primary health care managers, appointed internal facilitators and health care professionals on supporting change was explored. DESIGN: This study had an explorative qualitative design using data gathered from individual interviews and focus groups. Qualitative content analysis with a deductive category development was applied using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted in a primary care setting in central Sweden as a part of the Act in Time research project. Prior to a multifaceted implementation strategy, we held 16 individual interviews with managers and appointed facilitators and five focus groups with 26 health care professionals. RESULTS: Managers, facilitators, and professionals held similar expectations, where their expressed need for support corresponded to three constructs: Readiness for implementation, Implementation climate, and Engaging. Our findings indicate the need for strong leadership engagement to focus on how the healthy lifestyle-promoting practice can be anchored among the professionals. Managers at all levels should communicate the vision and goals, enable facilitators and professionals to improve their competencies, build inter-professional teams, and jointly plan the new practice. CONCLUSION: To change to a healthy lifestyle promoting practice professionals request support from their managers, who in turn need support from the middle and top managers. The requested support includes helping to prioritise health promotion and enabling the primary care centres to build competence and take ownership of the implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04799860.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many registered nurses (RNs) worked on the frontline caring for severely ill patients. They did so with limited knowledge of how to treat and prevent the disease. This extreme situation puts pressure on RNs to find evidence on which to base the care of their patients. Aims: To examine: (1) the extent to which evidence-based practice (EBP) process was applied by Swedish RN cohorts 15–19 years after graduation during the pandemic, (2) whether there was any change to their EBP process from pre-pandemic to late pandemic, (3) the relationship between RNs' use of the EBP process and the duration of exposure to work situations severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and (4) whether level of education, position and care setting were associated with the extent of RNs' EBP process. Methods: In 2021, the level of EBP activities was investigated among 2237 RNs 15–19 years after graduation. The scale used to measure EBP consisted of six items of the EBP process. Unpaired t-tests or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used in the analysis. Results: RNs used the EBP process to a moderate extent to inform and transform their clinical practice. There was a minor but significant decrease in practicing the EBP process from pre-pandemic to late in the pandemic. RNs who were most affected by the pandemic scored higher on the scale than less-affected colleagues. RNs in nonclinical positions reported more EBP activities, as did RNs in management positions. RNs working in outpatient settings reported more EBP activities than their colleagues in hospitals. Linking Evidence to Action: It is imperative that RNs hone their skills in EBP if they are to be prepared for future healthcare crises. Healthcare providers have a duty to facilitate the development of EBP and, in this regard, RNs in clinical positions in hospitals need particular support. © 2023 The Authors. Worldviews on Evidence-based Nursing published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on beha

BACKGROUND: There is moderate to strong evidence of the effectiveness of health-promotion interventions, but implementation in routine primary health care (PHC) has been slow. In the Act in Time project implementation support is provided for a health promotion practice using individually targeted lifestyle interventions in a PHC setting. Identifying health care professionals' (HCPs') perceptions of barriers and facilitators helps adapt implementation activities and achieve a more successful implementation. This study aimed, at a pre-implementation stage, to describe the expectations of managers, appointed internal facilitators (IFs) and HCPs on implementing a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice in PHC. METHODS: In this qualitative study five focus group discussions with 27 HCPs and 16 individual interviews with managers and appointed IFs were conducted at five PHC centres in central Sweden. The PHC centres are participating in the Act in Time project, evaluating the process and outcomes of a multifaceted implementation strategy for a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice. A deductive qualitative content analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was followed using inductive analysis. RESULTS: Twelve constructs from four of five CFIR domains were derived: Innovation characteristics, Outer setting, Inner setting, and Characteristics of individuals. These domains are related to the expectations of HCPs to implement a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice, which includes facilitating factors and barriers. The inductive analysis showed that the HCPs perceived a need for a health-promotion approach to PHC. It serves the needs of the patients and the expectations of the HCPs, but lifestyle interventions must be co-produced with the patient. The HCPs expected that changing routine practice into a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice would be challenging, requiring sustainability, improved structures, cooperation in inter-professional team

Numerous endeavours to ensure that day-to-day healthcare is both evidence-based and person-centred have generated extensive, although partial, comprehension of what guarantees quality improvement. To address quality issues, researchers and clinicians have developed several strategies as well as implementation theories, models, and frameworks. However, more progress is needed regarding how to facilitate guideline and policy implementation that guarantees effective changes take place in a timely and safe manner. This paper considers experiences of engaging and supporting local facilitators in knowledge implementation. Drawing on several interventions, considering both training and support, this general commentary discusses whom to engage and the length, content, quantity, and type of support along with expected outcomes of facilitators' activities. In addition, this paper suggests that patient facilitators could help produce evidence-based and person-centred care. We conclude that research about the roles and functions of facilitators needs to include more structured follow-ups and also improvement projects. This can increase the speed of learning with respect to what works, for whom, in what context, why (or why not), and with what outcomes when it comes to facilitator support and tasks.

Background There is growing evidence that context mediates the effects of implementation interventions intended to increase healthcare professionals’ use of research evidence in clinical practice. However, conceptual clarity about what comprises context is elusive. The purpose of this study was to advance conceptual clarity on context by developing the Implementation in Context Framework, a meta-framework of the context domains, attributes and features that can facilitate or hinder healthcare professionals’ use of research evidence and the effectiveness of implementation interventions in clinical practice. Methods We conducted a meta-synthesis of data from three interrelated studies: (1) a concept analysis of published literature on context (n = 70 studies), (2) a secondary analysis of healthcare professional interviews (n = 145) examining context across 11 unique studies and (3) a descriptive qualitative study comprised of interviews with heath system stakeholders (n = 39) in four countries to elicit their tacit knowledge on the attributes and features of context. A rigorous protocol was followed for the meta-synthesis, resulting in development of the Implementation in Context Framework. Following this meta-synthesis, the framework was further refined through feedback from experts in context and implementation science. Results In the Implementation in Context Framework, context is conceptualized in three levels: micro (individual), meso (organizational), and macro (external). The three levels are composed of six contextual domains: (1) actors (micro), (2) organizational climate and structures (meso), (3) organizational social behaviour (meso), (4) organizational response to change (meso), (5) organizational processes (meso) and (6) external influences (macro). These six domains contain 22 core attributes of context and 108 features that illustrate these attributes. Conclusions The Implementation in Context Framework is the only meta-framework of context available t

BACKGROUND: There is moderate to strong evidence of the effectiveness of health-promotion interventions, but implementation in routine primary health care (PHC) has been slow. In the Act in Time project implementation support is provided for a health promotion practice using individually targeted lifestyle interventions in a PHC setting. Identifying health care professionals' (HCPs') perceptions of barriers and facilitators helps adapt implementation activities and achieve a more successful implementation. This study aimed, at a pre-implementation stage, to describe the expectations of managers, appointed internal facilitators (IFs) and HCPs on implementing a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice in PHC. METHODS: In this qualitative study five focus group discussions with 27 HCPs and 16 individual interviews with managers and appointed IFs were conducted at five PHC centres in central Sweden. The PHC centres are participating in the Act in Time project, evaluating the process and outcomes of a multifaceted implementation strategy for a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice. A deductive qualitative content analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was followed using inductive analysis. RESULTS: Twelve constructs from four of five CFIR domains were derived: Innovation characteristics, Outer setting, Inner setting, and Characteristics of individuals. These domains are related to the expectations of HCPs to implement a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice, which includes facilitating factors and barriers. The inductive analysis showed that the HCPs perceived a need for a health-promotion approach to PHC. It serves the needs of the patients and the expectations of the HCPs, but lifestyle interventions must be co-produced with the patient. The HCPs expected that changing routine practice into a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice would be challenging, requiring sustainability, improved structures, cooperation in inter-professional team

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to describe the time and costs used during the implementation of a more person-centred care (PCC) approach as part of ordinary practice. DESIGN: A case study with embedded units. SETTING: Region Dalarna, Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: The Department for Development (DD) staff who provided a central support function in the implementation and six healthcare units: nephrology, two geriatric care and rehabilitation units, two psychiatry units and primary care. INTERVENTIONS: More PCC. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Working days and related salary costs reported by categories indicating costs for implementation strategies, service delivery, and research/development costs. RESULTS: The healthcare units logged on average 5.5 working days per staff member. In the healthcare units, 6%-57% of the time reported was used for implementation strategies, 40%-90% for service delivery and 2%-12% for research/development. Of the time reported by the DD, 88% was assigned to implementation strategies. Costs associated with reported time indicated 23% of costs for this implementation occurred in the DD. Using the budgeted cost, this proportion increased to 48%. The budget for the DD corresponded to SEK 2.30 per citizen per year and 0.009% of the total healthcare budget of the region. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that a large part of resources used for this implementation of more PCC occurred in the DD, although at least half of the costs occurred in the healthcare units. Moreover, the cost of providing a central support function corresponds to a tiny proportion of the total health budget.