Mosson Rebecca, Augustsson Hanna, Bäck Annika, Åhström Mårten, von Thiele Schwarz Ulrica, Richter Anne, Gunnarsson Malin, Hasson Henna
Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Medical Management Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Tomtebodavägen 18a, 17177, Stockholm, Sweden.
Center for Epidemiology and Community Medicine, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 May 7;19(1):287. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4086-1.
Managers and professionals in health and social care are required to implement evidence-based methods. Despite this, they generally lack training in implementation. In clinical settings, implementation is often a team effort, so it calls for team training. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the Building Implementation Capacity (BIC) intervention that targets teams of professionals, including their managers.
A non-randomized design was used, with two intervention cases (each consisting of two groups). The longitudinal, mixed-methods evaluation included pre-post and workshop-evaluation questionnaires, and interviews following Kirkpatrick's four-level evaluation framework. The intervention was delivered in five workshops, using a systematic implementation method with exercises and practical working materials. To improve transfer of training, the teams' managers were included. Practical experiences were combined with theoretical knowledge, social interactions, reflections, and peer support.
Overall, the participants were satisfied with the intervention (first level), and all groups increased their self-rated implementation knowledge (second level). The qualitative results indicated that most participants applied what they had learned by enacting new implementation behaviors (third level). However, they only partially applied the implementation method, as they did not use the planned systematic approach. A few changes in organizational results occurred (fourth level).
The intervention had positive effects with regard to the first two levels of the evaluation model; that is, the participants were satisfied with the intervention and improved their knowledge and skills. Some positive changes also occurred on the third level (behaviors) and fourth level (organizational results), but these were not as clear as the results for the first two levels. This highlights the fact that further optimization is needed to improve transfer of training when building teams' implementation capacity. In addition to considering the design of such interventions, the organizational context and the participants' characteristics may also need to be considered to maximize the chances that the learned skills will be successfully transferred to behaviors.
卫生与社会保健领域的管理人员和专业人员需要实施循证方法。尽管如此,他们通常缺乏实施方面的培训。在临床环境中,实施往往是团队共同努力的结果,因此需要进行团队培训。本研究的目的是评估针对包括管理人员在内的专业人员团队的建设实施能力(BIC)干预措施的效果。
采用非随机设计,有两个干预案例(每个案例由两个组组成)。纵向混合方法评估包括前后调查问卷和工作坊评估问卷,以及遵循柯克帕特里克四级评估框架的访谈。干预通过五个工作坊进行,采用系统的实施方法,包括练习和实用的工作材料。为了提高培训的迁移效果,将团队的管理人员纳入其中。实践经验与理论知识、社交互动、反思和同伴支持相结合。
总体而言,参与者对干预措施感到满意(第一级),所有组的自我评估实施知识都有所增加(第二级)。定性结果表明,大多数参与者通过实施新的实施行为应用了所学知识(第三级)。然而,他们只是部分应用了实施方法,因为他们没有采用计划好的系统方法。组织结果发生了一些变化(第四级)。
干预措施在评估模型的前两级产生了积极效果;也就是说,参与者对干预措施感到满意,并提高了他们的知识和技能。在第三级(行为)和第四级(组织结果)也出现了一些积极变化,但不如前两级的结果明显。这凸显了一个事实,即在建设团队实施能力时,需要进一步优化以提高培训的迁移效果。除了考虑此类干预措施的设计外,还可能需要考虑组织背景和参与者的特征,以最大限度地提高所学技能成功转化为行为的机会。