Towards a measurement instrument for determinants of innovations

Margot A H Fleuren, Theo G W M Paulussen, Paula Van Dommelen, Stef Van Buuren, Margot A H Fleuren, Theo G W M Paulussen, Paula Van Dommelen, Stef Van Buuren

Abstract

Objective: To develop a short instrument to measure determinants of innovations that may affect its implementation.

Design: We pooled the original data from eight empirical studies of the implementation of evidence-based innovations. The studies used a list of 60 potentially relevant determinants based on a systematic review of empirical studies and a Delphi study among implementation experts. Each study used similar methods to measure both the implementation of the innovation and determinants. Missing values in the final data set were replaced by plausible values using multiple imputation. We assessed which determinants predicted completeness of use of the innovation (% of recommendations applied). In addition, 22 implementation experts were consulted about the results and about implications for designing a short instrument.

Setting: Eight innovations introduced in Preventive Child Health Care or schools in the Netherlands.

Participants: Doctors, nurses, doctor's assistants and teachers; 1977 respondents in total.

Results: The initial list of 60 determinants could be reduced to 29. Twenty-one determinants were based on the pooled analysis of the eight studies, seven on the theoretical expectations of the experts consulted and one new determinant was added on the basis of the experts' practical experience.

Conclusions: The instrument is promising and should be further validated. We invite researchers to use and explore the instrument in multiple settings. The instrument describes how each determinant should preferably be measured (questions and response scales). It can be used both before and after the introduction of an innovation to gain an understanding of the critical change objectives.

Keywords: implementation; preventive child healthcare; school-based health promotion.

© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Framework representing the innovation process and related categories of determinants [9].

References

    1. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, et al. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82:581–629.
    1. Fixsen DL, Noaam SF, Blase KA, et al. Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Florida: University of South Florida; 2005.
    1. Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Thomas R, et al. Toward evidence-based quality improvement. Evidence (and its limitations) of the effectiveness of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies 1966–1998. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(Suppl 2):S14–20.
    1. Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M. Improving Patient Care: The Implementation of Change in Clinical Practice. Edingburgh: Elsevier; 2005.
    1. Prior M, Guerin M, Grimmer-Somers K. The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies—a synthesis of systematic review findings. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;14:888–97.
    1. Gulbrandsson K. From News to Everyday Use: The Difficult Art of Implementation. Ostersund: Swedish National Institute of Public Health; 2008.
    1. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free press; 2003.
    1. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89:1322–7.
    1. Fleuren M, Wiefferink K, Paulussen T. Determinants of innovation within health care organizations: literature review and Delphi study. Int J Qual Health Care. 2004;16:107–23.
    1. Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, et al. Planning Health Promotion Programs: an Intervention Mapping Approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2006.
    1. Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York: Wiley; 1987.
    1. Buuren van S, Boshuizen HC, Knook DL. Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Stat Med. 1999;18:681–94.
    1. Buuren van S. Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007;16:219–42.
    1. Buuren van S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. MICE: multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. J Stat Software. 2011;45:1–67.
    1. Buuren van S. Flexible Imputation of Missing Data. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press; 2012.
    1. Sterne JA, White IR, Carlin JB, et al. Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls. BMJ. 2009;338:b2393.
    1. Lee KJ, Carlin JB. Mulitple imputation for missing data: fully conditional specification versus multivariate normal imputation. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;171:624–63.
    1. Fleuren MAH, Verlaan ML, Velzen-Mol van HWM, et al. Leiden: TNO Kwaliteit van Leven; 2006. Zicht op het gebruik van de JGZ-standaard Opsporing van Visuele Stoornissen 0–19 jaar: een landelijk implementatieproject. [Looking closely at adherence to the Preventive Child Health Care guideline on early detection of visual disorders]
    1. Fleuren MAH, Dommelen van P, Kamphuis M, et al. Leiden: TNO Kwaliteit van Leven; 2007. Landelijke Implementatie JGZ-standaard Vroegtijdige Opsporing van Aangeboren Hartafwijkingen 0–19 jaar [National implementation of the Preventive CHild Health Care guideline on early detection of congenital health disorders]
    1. Broerse A, Fleuren MAH, Kamphuis M, et al. Leiden: TNO Kwaliteit van Leven; 2009. Effectonderzoek proefimplementatie JGZ-richtlijn secundaire preventie kindermishandeling [Evaluation of the pilot implementation of the Preventive Child Health Care guideline on secondary prevention of child abuse]
    1. Galindo Garre F, Kamphuis M, Verheijden MW, et al. Leiden: TNO Kwaliteit van Leven; 2010. Onderzoek naar de mogelijkheden en haalbaarheid van E-learning bij de implementatie van richtlijnen in de jeugdgezondheidszorg [Feasibility and effect of e-learning on the implementation of Preventive Child Health Care guidelines]
    1. Crone MR, Verlaan M, Willemsen MC, et al. Sustainability of the prevention of passive infant smoking within well-baby clinics. Health Educ Behav. 2006;33:178–96.
    1. Wiefferink CH, Poelman J, Linthorst M, et al. Outcomes of a systematically designed strategy for the implementation of sex education in Dutch secondary schools. Health Educ Res. 2005;20:323–33.
    1. Collins LM, Schafer JL, Kam CM. A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures. Psychol Methods. 2001;6:330–51.
    1. Adams AS, Soumerai SB, Lomas J, et al. Evidence of self-report bias in assessing adherence to guidelines. Int J Qual Health Care. 1999;11:187–92.
    1. Flottorp SA, Oxman AD, Krause J, et al. A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: a systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. Implement Sci. 2013;8:35.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit