组织变革准备度:对医疗保健文献的系统评价
Organizational readiness for change: A systematic review of the healthcare literature.
作者信息
Caci Laura, Nyantakyi Emanuela, Blum Kathrin, Sonpar Ashlesha, Schultes Marie-Therese, Albers Bianca, Clack Lauren
机构信息
Institute for Implementation Science in Health Care, Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Department of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
出版信息
Implement Res Pract. 2025 May 15;6:26334895251334536. doi: 10.1177/26334895251334536. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
BACKGROUND
Organizational readiness for change (ORC), referring to psychological and behavioral preparedness of organizational members for implementation, is often cited in healthcare implementation research. However, evidence about whether and under which conditions ORC is relevant for positive implementation results remains ambiguous, with past studies building on various theories and assessing ORC with different measures. To strengthen the ORC knowledge base, we therefore identified factors investigated in the empirical literature alongside ORC, or as mediators and/or moderators of ORC and implementation.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic review of experimental, observational, and hybrid studies in physical, mental, and public health care that included a quantitative assessment of ORC and at least one other factor (e.g., ORC correlate, predictor, moderator, or mediator). Studies were identified searching five online databases and bibliographies of included studies, employing dual abstract and full text screening. The study synthesis was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research integrated with the Theory of ORC. Study quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
RESULTS
Of 2,907 identified studies, 47 met inclusion criteria, investigating a broad range of factors alongside ORC, particularly contextual factors related to individuals and the innovation. Various ORC measures, both home-grown or theory-informed, were used, confirming a lack of conceptual clarity surrounding ORC. In most studies, ORC was measured only once.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review highlights the broad range of factors investigated in relation to ORC, suggesting that such investigation may enhance interpretation of implementation results. However, the observed diversity in ORC conceptualization and measurement supports previous calls for clearer conceptual definitions of ORC. Future efforts should integrate team-level perspectives, recognizing ORC as both an individual and team attribute. Prioritizing the use of rigorous, repeated ORC measures in longitudinal implementation research is essential for advancing the collective ORC knowledge base.
背景
组织变革准备度(ORC)指组织成员为实施变革所做的心理和行为准备,在医疗保健实施研究中经常被提及。然而,关于ORC是否以及在何种条件下与积极的实施结果相关的证据仍不明确,过去的研究基于各种理论并使用不同的方法来评估ORC。因此,为了加强ORC的知识基础,我们确定了实证文献中与ORC一起研究的因素,或作为ORC与实施之间的中介和/或调节因素。
方法
我们对物理、心理和公共卫生保健领域的实验性、观察性和混合性研究进行了系统综述,这些研究包括对ORC和至少一个其他因素(如ORC相关因素、预测因素、调节因素或中介因素)的定量评估。通过搜索五个在线数据库和纳入研究的参考文献来识别研究,采用双盲摘要和全文筛选。研究综合以实施研究综合框架与ORC理论相结合为指导。使用混合方法评估工具对研究质量进行评估。
结果
在2907项已识别的研究中,47项符合纳入标准,研究了与ORC相关的广泛因素,特别是与个人和创新相关的背景因素。使用了各种ORC测量方法,包括自行开发的或基于理论的方法,这证实了围绕ORC缺乏概念清晰度。在大多数研究中,ORC仅测量了一次。
结论
这项系统综述突出了与ORC相关的广泛研究因素,表明此类研究可能会增强对实施结果的解释。然而,观察到的ORC概念化和测量的多样性支持了先前对ORC更清晰概念定义的呼吁。未来的努力应整合团队层面的观点,将ORC视为个人和团队的属性。在纵向实施研究中优先使用严格、重复的ORC测量方法对于推进ORC的集体知识基础至关重要。