Silver Santana R, Jones Kayla Christine, Hook Kimberly, Crable Erika L, George Emily R, Serwint Janet R, Austad Kirsten, Walkey Allan, Drainoni Mari-Lynn
Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine.
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
Res Sq. 2024 May 21:rs.3.rs-4366064. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4366064/v1.
BACKGROUND: Understanding how and when a new evidence-based clinical intervention becomes standard practice is crucial to ensure that healthcare is delivered in alignment with the most up-to-date knowledge. However, rigorous methods are needed to determine when a new clinical practice becomes normalized to the standard of care. To address this gap, this study qualitatively explores how, when, and why a clinical practice change becomes normalized within healthcare organizations. METHODS: We used purposive sampling to recruit clinical leaders who worked in implementation science across diverse health contexts. Enrolled participants completed semi-structured interviews. Qualitative data analysis was guided by a modified version of the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) framework to identify salient themes. Identified normalization strategies were mapped to the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC) project. RESULTS: A total of 17 individuals were interviewed. Participants described four key signals for identifying when a novel clinical practice becomes the new normal: 1) integration into existing workflows; 2) scaling across the entire organizational unit; 3) staff buy-in and ownership; and 4) sustainment without ongoing monitoring. Participants identified salient strategies to normalize new clinical interventions: 1) taking a patient approach; 2) gaining staff buy-in and ownership; and 3) conducting ongoing measurement of progress towards normalization. CONCLUSIONS: The results offer valuable insight into the indicators that signify when a novel clinical practice becomes normalized, and the strategies employed to facilitate this transition. These findings can inform future research to develop instruments that implementation leaders can use to systematically measure the clinical change process.
背景:了解一种基于证据的新临床干预措施如何以及何时成为标准做法,对于确保医疗保健与最新知识保持一致至关重要。然而,需要严谨的方法来确定一种新的临床实践何时规范化为护理标准。为了填补这一空白,本研究定性地探讨了临床实践变革在医疗保健组织中如何、何时以及为何实现规范化。 方法:我们采用目的抽样法招募了在不同健康背景下从事实施科学工作的临床领导者。入选的参与者完成了半结构化访谈。定性数据分析以规范化过程理论(NPT)框架的修改版为指导,以确定突出主题。将确定的规范化策略映射到实施变革专家建议(ERIC)项目。 结果:共采访了17人。参与者描述了识别一种新的临床实践何时成为新常态的四个关键信号:1)融入现有工作流程;2)在整个组织单位范围内推广;3)员工的认可和主人翁意识;4)无需持续监测即可维持。参与者确定了使新的临床干预措施规范化的突出策略:1)采取以患者为中心的方法;2)获得员工的认可和主人翁意识;3)对规范化进展进行持续衡量。 结论:研究结果为表明一种新的临床实践何时实现规范化的指标以及为促进这一转变所采用的策略提供了有价值的见解。这些发现可为未来研究提供参考,以开发实施领导者可用于系统衡量临床变革过程的工具。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024-12-18
BMC Health Serv Res. 2016-8-15
Front Health Serv. 2022-11-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
Qatar Med J. 2019-11-7
Implement Sci Commun. 2020-3-11