Corson Cecelia L, Nembhard Ingrid M, Bonafide Christopher P, Foglia Elizabeth E, Lee Henry C, Handley Sara C
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 3733 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
SSM Qual Res Health. 2025 Jun;7. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2025.100557. Epub 2025 Apr 1.
Variation persists in the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for delivery room resuscitation associated with high-quality care. To date, research has often studied leaders and rarely focused on the perspectives of delivery room resuscitation team members. We investigated team member perspectives on facilitators and barriers to accepting and implementing EBPs in delivery room resuscitation.
This is a qualitative analysis of responses to open-ended questions in a twice-administered survey of delivery room resuscitation team members from a 16-hospital network. We conducted a two-phase content analysis, I) inductive conventional content analysis and II) deductive directed content analysis, to map response themes onto the three elements of the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework - evidence, facilitation, and context.
There were 569 responses from 322 individuals representing all delivery room resuscitation team member roles. We identified five main themes that influence acceptance and implementation of EBPs: evidence, education, process characteristics, leadership, and change mindset. These themes aligned with the PARIHS framework elements of Evidence, Facilitation (occurring through education and process characteristics), and Context (determined by leadership and change mindset). We identified 12 sub-themes; 9 applied to both acceptance and implementation of EBPs, 1 applied only to acceptance of EBPs, and 2 applied only to implementation of EBPs.
While many facilitators and barriers are consistent for both acceptance and implementation, some differ. To optimize EBPs in delivery room resuscitation, organizations may benefit from tailoring interventions to incorporate facilitators and address barriers that influence EBP acceptance and/or implementation.
与高质量护理相关的产房复苏循证实践(EBPs)的实施仍存在差异。迄今为止,研究通常关注领导者,很少关注产房复苏团队成员的观点。我们调查了团队成员对在产房复苏中接受和实施循证实践的促进因素和障碍的看法。
这是对来自一个16家医院网络的产房复苏团队成员进行的两次调查中对开放式问题的回答的定性分析。我们进行了两阶段的内容分析,I)归纳式传统内容分析和II)演绎式定向内容分析,以将回答主题映射到卫生服务研究实施促进行动(PARIHS)框架的三个要素——证据、促进和背景上。
来自322名个体的569份回答代表了所有产房复苏团队成员的角色。我们确定了影响循证实践接受和实施的五个主要主题:证据、教育、过程特征、领导力和变革心态。这些主题与PARIHS框架的要素一致,即证据、促进(通过教育和过程特征实现)和背景(由领导力和变革心态决定)。我们确定了12个子主题;9个适用于循证实践的接受和实施,1个仅适用于循证实践的接受,2个仅适用于循证实践的实施。
虽然许多促进因素和障碍在接受和实施方面是一致的,但也有一些不同。为了优化产房复苏中的循证实践,组织可能会受益于量身定制干预措施,纳入促进因素并解决影响循证实践接受和/或实施的障碍。