Advertisement

Factors Associated with Effective Implementation: Research and Practical Implications

  • Melanie BarwickEmail author
  • Raluca Dubrowski
  • Laura Damschroder
Chapter
  • 25 Downloads

Abstract

There is tremendous value in considering the utility of theories and conceptual frameworks to inform research and practice. This chapter reviews research on the factors within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research that are associated with implementation success in studies that represent different settings and interventions: a weight management program in a large integrated US healthcare system; an e-health application in Norway; and a Canadian study of a maternal and child health intervention undertaken in Mali and Ethiopia. We review how these studies identify contextual factors that are associated with effective implementation and, thus, help to differentiate between high and low implementers as well as to highlight factors that can be manipulated throughout the implementation process to improve success. Through a review of these studies, we document how the use of this framework propels our understanding of successful implementation in a way that informs both research and practice.

Keywords

Conceptual framework Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research External validity 

References

  1. Barwick, M. (Unpublished). Checklist for assessing readiness for implementation. Retrieved 4 July 2016 from http://melaniebarwick.com/implementation.php
  2. Barwick, M., Barac, R., Akrong, L. M., Johnson, S., & Chaban, P. (2014). Bringing evidence to the classroom: Exploring educator notions of evidence and preferences for practice change. International Education Research, 2(4), 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.12735/ier.v2i4p01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barwick M, Kimber M, Akrong L, Johnson S, Cunningham CE, Bennett K, Ashbourne G, Godden T. (2019). Advancing Implementation Frameworks with a Mixed Methods Multi-Case Study in Child Behavioral Health. Translational Behavioral Medicine, ibz005, https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibz005
  4. Barwick, M., Barac, R., & Zlotkin, S. (2015). Evaluation of effective implementation of exclusive breastfeeding in Ethiopia and Mali using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Canada: Hospital for Sick Children. http://melaniebarwick.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2019/02/EBF-Research-Report-FINAL-July-29-2015.pdf.
  5. Bauer, M. S., Damschroder, L., Hagedorn, H., Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A. M. (2015). An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychology, 3(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd, M. R., Powell, B. J., Endicott, D., & Lewis, C. C. (2018). A method for tracking implementation strategies: An exemplar implementing measurement-based care in community behavioral health clinics. Behaviour Therapy, 49(4), 525–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaudoir, S. R., Dugan, A. G., & Barr, C. H. (2013). Measuring factors affecting implementation of health innovations: A systematic review of structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level measures. Implementation Science, 8(1), 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clancy, C. M. (2011). Patient engagement in health care. Health Services Research, 46(2), 389–393.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01254.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data, complementary research strategies. London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Curran, G. M., Bauer, M., Mittman, B., Pyne, J. M., & Stetler, C. (2012). Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: Combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Medical Care, 50(3), 217–226.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Damschroder, J. L., & Lowery, J. C. (2013). Evaluation of a large-scale weight management program using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation Science, 8, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Damschroder, L., Aron, D., Keith, R., Kirsh, S., Alexander, J., & Lowery, J. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4(1), 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davidoff, F., Dixon-Woods, M., Leviton, L., & Michie, S. (2015). Demystifying theory and its use in improvement. BMJ Quality & Safety, 24, 228–238.Google Scholar
  14. Denis, J.-L., Hébert, Y., Langley, A., Lozeau, D., & Trottier, L.-H. (2002). Explaining diffusion patterns for complex health care innovations. Health Care Management Review, 27, 60–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Department of Health United Kingdom. (2007). Improving access to psychological therapies. Retrieved from http://iapt.nhs.uk/silo/files/specification-for-the-commissionerled-pathfinder-programme.pdf
  16. Feldstein, A. C., & Glasgow, R. E. (2008). A practical, robust implementation and sustainability model (PRISM) for integrating research findings into practice. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 34(4), 228–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forman, J., & Damschroder, L. J. (2008). Qualitative content analysis. In L. Jacoby & L. A. Siminoff (Eds.), Empirical methods for bioethics: A primer (pp. 39–62). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  18. Foy, R., Ovretveit, J., Shekelle, P. G., Pronovost, P. J., Taylor, S. L., Dy, S., … Wachter, R. M. (2011). The role of theory in research to develop and evaluate the implementation of patient safety practices. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 20(5), 453–459.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs.2010.047993. Epub 2011 Feb 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Government of Australia. (2001). Australian General Practice Network. National primary care initiative. Better outcomes in mental health care initiative. Retrieved from http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/mental-boimhc
  20. Government of Ontario. (2011). Open minds, healthy minds: Ontario’s comprehensive mental health and addictions strategy. Retrieved from http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/common/ministry/publications/reports/mental_health2011/mentalhealth_rep2011.pdf
  21. Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Quarterly, 82, 581–629.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grol, R. P., Bosch, M. C., Hulscher, M. E., Eccles, M. P., & Wensing, M. (2007). Planning and studying improvement in patient care: The use of theoretical perspectives. The Milbank Quarterly, 85, 93–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gustafson, D. H., Sainfort, F., Eichler, M., Adams, L., Bisognano, M., & Steudel, H. (2003). Developing and testing a model to predict outcomes of organizational change. Health Services Research, 38, 751–776.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.00143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New York, NY: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  25. Helfrich, C. D., Weiner, B. J., McKinney, M. M., & Minasian, L. (2007). Determinants of implementation effectiveness: Adapting a framework for complex innovations. Medical Care Research and Review, 64(3), 279–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirk, M. A., Kelley, C., Yankey, N., Birken, S. A., Abadie, B., & Damschroder, L. (2016). A systematic review of the use of the consolidated framework for implementation research. Implementation Science, 11, 72.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0437-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kiser, L., Blasé, K., & Fixsen, D. (2013). The hexagon tool: Exploring context. Chapel Hill, NC: The National Implementation Research Network. Retrieved 4 July 2016 from http://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/sites/implementation.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/NIRN-Education-TheHexagonTool.pdf
  28. Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001). Implementing computerized technology: An organizational analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 811–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leeman, J., Birken, S. A., Powell, B. J., Rohweder, C., & Shea, C. M. (2017). Beyond “implementation strategies”: Classifying the full range of strategies used in implementation science and practice. Implementation Science, 12(1), 125.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0657-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewis, C., & Dorsey, C. (2020). Advancing implementation science measurement. In R. Mildon, B. Albers, & A. Shlonsky (Eds.), The Science of Implementation (pp.). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Lewis, C. C., Stanick, C. F., Martinez, R. G., Weiner, B. J., Kim, M., Barwick, M., & Comtois, K. A. (2015). The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration instrument review project: A methodology to promote rigorous evaluation. Implementation Science, 10, 2.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0193-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lukas, C. V., Holmes, S. K., Cohen, A. B., Restuccia, J., Cramer, I. E., Shwartz, M., & Charns, M. P. (2007). Transformational change in health care systems: An organizational model. Health Care Management Review, 32, 309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martinez, R., Lewis, C., & Weiner, B. (2014). Instrumentation issues in implementation science. Implementation Science, 9(1), 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1.Google Scholar
  35. McKibbon, K. A., Lokker, C., Wilczynski, N. L., Ciliska, D., Dobbins, M., Davis, D. A., … Straus, S. E. (2010). A cross-sectional study of the number and frequency of terms used to refer to knowledge translation in a body of health literature in 2006: A Tower of Babel? Implementation Science, 5, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-16
  36. Meyers, D. C., Durlak, J. A., & Wandersman, A. (2012). The quality implementation framework: A synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(3–4), 462–480.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9522-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  38. Mitchell, S. A., Fisher, C. A., Hastings, C. E., Silverman, L. B., & Wallen, G. R. (2010). A thematic analysis of theoretical models for translational science in nursing: Mapping the field. Nursing Outlook, 58(6), 287–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moulin, J., Sabater-Hernandez, D., Fernandez-Llimos, F., & Benrimoj, S. (2015). A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework. Health Research Policy and Systems, 13(16). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-015-0005-z
  40. New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. (2003). Achieving the promise: Transforming mental health in America – Final report. Retrieved from http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/mentalhealthcommission/reports/FinalReport/downloads/FinalReport.pdf
  41. Nilsen, P. (2015). Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implementation Science, 10, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nilsen, P. (2020). Making sense of implementation theories, models, and frameworks. In R. Mildon, B. Albers, & A. Shlonsky (Eds.), The Science of Implementation (pp.). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., … Kirchner, J. E. (2015). A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science, 10, 21.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Prost, A., Colbourn, T., Seward, N., Azad, K., Coomarasamy, A., Copas, A., … Costello, A. (2013). Women’s groups practising participatory learning and action to improve maternal and newborn health in low-resource settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet, 381, 1736–1746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sales, A., Smith, J., Curran, G., & Kochevar, L. (2006). Models, strategies, and tools. Theory in implementing evidence-based findings into health care practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(Suppl 2), S43–S49.Google Scholar
  46. Shojania, K. G., Jennings, A., Mayhew, A., Ramsay, C. R., Eccles, M. P., & Grimshaw, J. (2009). The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews, (3), CD001096.Google Scholar
  47. Shortell, S. M., Marsteller, J. A., Lin, M., Pearson, M. L., Wu, S. Y., Mendel, P., … Rosen, M. (2004). The role of perceived team effectiveness in improving chronic illness care. Medical Care, 42(11), 1040–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tabak, R. G., Khoong, E. C., Chambers, D. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2012). Bridging research and practice: Models for dissemination and implementation research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van Achterberg, T., Schoonhoven, L., & Grol, R. (2008). Nursing implementation science: How evidence based nursing requires evidence based implementation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 40(4), 302–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Varsi, C., Ekstedt, M., Gammon, D., & Ruland, C. M. (2015). Using the consolidated framework for implementation research to identify barriers and facilitators for the implementation of an internet-based patient-provider communication service in five settings: A qualitative study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 17(11), e262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Melanie Barwick
    • 1
    Email author
  • Raluca Dubrowski
    • 1
  • Laura Damschroder
    • 2
  1. 1.Hospital for Sick ChildrenTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management ResearchWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations