Bunce Arwen E, Gold Rachel, Davis James V, McMullen Carmit K, Jaworski Victoria, Mercer MaryBeth, Nelson Christine
Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Ave., Portland, OR, 97227, USA.
OCHIN, Inc., 1881 SW Naito Parkway, Portland, OR, 97201, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Dec 5;14:607. doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0607-0.
The recent growth of implementation research in care delivery systems has led to a renewed interest in methodological approaches that deliver not only intervention outcome data but also deep understanding of the complex dynamics underlying the implementation process. We suggest that an ethnographic approach to process evaluation, when informed by and integrated with quantitative data, can provide this nuanced insight into intervention outcomes. The specific methods used in such ethnographic process evaluations are rarely presented in detail; our objective is to stimulate a conversation around the successes and challenges of specific data collection methods in health care settings. We use the example of a translational clinical trial among 11 community clinics in Portland, OR that are implementing an evidence-based, health-information technology (HIT)-based intervention focused on patients with diabetes.
Our ethnographic process evaluation employed weekly diaries by clinic-based study employees, observation, informal and formal interviews, document review, surveys, and group discussions to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation success, provide insight into the quantitative study outcomes, and uncover lessons potentially transferable to other implementation projects. These methods captured the depth and breadth of factors contributing to intervention uptake, while minimizing disruption to clinic work and supporting mid-stream shifts in implementation strategies. A major challenge is the amount of dedicated researcher time required. The deep understanding of the 'how' and 'why' behind intervention outcomes that can be gained through an ethnographic approach improves the credibility and transferability of study findings. We encourage others to share their own experiences with ethnography in implementation evaluation and health services research, and to consider adapting the methods and tools described here for their own research.
护理提供系统中实施研究的近期发展,引发了人们对方法论的新兴趣,这些方法论不仅能提供干预结果数据,还能深入理解实施过程背后的复杂动态。我们认为,当人种志方法用于过程评估,并以定量数据为依据并与之整合时,能够对干预结果提供这种细致入微的见解。此类人种志过程评估中使用的具体方法很少详细介绍;我们的目的是激发关于医疗环境中特定数据收集方法的成功与挑战的讨论。我们以俄勒冈州波特兰市11家社区诊所开展的一项转化临床试验为例,这些诊所正在实施一项基于循证、以健康信息技术(HIT)为基础、针对糖尿病患者的干预措施。
我们的人种志过程评估采用了由诊所研究人员撰写的每周日志、观察、非正式和正式访谈、文件审查、调查以及小组讨论,以确定实施成功的障碍和促进因素,深入了解定量研究结果,并挖掘可能适用于其他实施项目的经验教训。这些方法捕捉到了促成干预措施采用的因素的深度和广度,同时将对诊所工作的干扰降至最低,并支持实施策略的中期调整。一个主要挑战是所需的研究人员专用时间量。通过人种志方法能够深入理解干预结果背后的“如何”及“为何”,这提高了研究结果的可信度和可转移性。我们鼓励其他人分享他们在实施评估和卫生服务研究中进行人种志研究的经验,并考虑根据自身研究情况调整此处描述的方法和工具。