5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Benefits, Barriers and Determinants of Clinical Pathway Use in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. A pilot study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Performance-oriented financing of healthcare aims at demand-based and efficient resource allocation. Often, clinical pathways (CPs) are introduced in this context.

          Purpose

          For CP success (a) the degree of utilization of and divergence, (b) cost effects and (c) health professionals’ acceptance rate of and satisfaction are relevant. There are gaps in research regarding these issues in general, and more specifically in the German speaking part of Europe.

          Methodology/Approach

          Employing a two-stage mixed-methods pilot study, we studied (a) and (b) quantitatively in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, and (c) qualitatively in Germany and Austria.

          Results

          Many hospitals already implemented CPs, but the utilization varies. They are expected to yield middle-range savings, but intangible benefits are more important. In general, employees are in favor of CPs, but several conditions need to be met, e.g. adaptability to local requirements.

          Conclusion

          Linking the results to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research showed many criteria are covered, which might lead to the positive evaluations, but also highlights the complexity of the intervention.

          Practice Implication

          As enhanced acceptance rates are expected to lead to higher benefits and vice versa, management team should safeguard employee participation and perceived benefits in all phases of the CP cycle.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

          Background Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. Methods We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. Results The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. Conclusion The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions

            Background Improving the design and implementation of evidence-based practice depends on successful behaviour change interventions. This requires an appropriate method for characterising interventions and linking them to an analysis of the targeted behaviour. There exists a plethora of frameworks of behaviour change interventions, but it is not clear how well they serve this purpose. This paper evaluates these frameworks, and develops and evaluates a new framework aimed at overcoming their limitations. Methods A systematic search of electronic databases and consultation with behaviour change experts were used to identify frameworks of behaviour change interventions. These were evaluated according to three criteria: comprehensiveness, coherence, and a clear link to an overarching model of behaviour. A new framework was developed to meet these criteria. The reliability with which it could be applied was examined in two domains of behaviour change: tobacco control and obesity. Results Nineteen frameworks were identified covering nine intervention functions and seven policy categories that could enable those interventions. None of the frameworks reviewed covered the full range of intervention functions or policies, and only a minority met the criteria of coherence or linkage to a model of behaviour. At the centre of a proposed new framework is a 'behaviour system' involving three essential conditions: capability, opportunity, and motivation (what we term the 'COM-B system'). This forms the hub of a 'behaviour change wheel' (BCW) around which are positioned the nine intervention functions aimed at addressing deficits in one or more of these conditions; around this are placed seven categories of policy that could enable those interventions to occur. The BCW was used reliably to characterise interventions within the English Department of Health's 2010 tobacco control strategy and the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence's guidance on reducing obesity. Conclusions Interventions and policies to change behaviour can be usefully characterised by means of a BCW comprising: a 'behaviour system' at the hub, encircled by intervention functions and then by policy categories. Research is needed to establish how far the BCW can lead to more efficient design of effective interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems

              Background Implementing new practices requires changes in the behaviour of relevant actors, and this is facilitated by understanding of the determinants of current and desired behaviours. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was developed by a collaboration of behavioural scientists and implementation researchers who identified theories relevant to implementation and grouped constructs from these theories into domains. The collaboration aimed to provide a comprehensive, theory-informed approach to identify determinants of behaviour. The first version was published in 2005, and a subsequent version following a validation exercise was published in 2012. This guide offers practical guidance for those who wish to apply the TDF to assess implementation problems and support intervention design. It presents a brief rationale for using a theoretical approach to investigate and address implementation problems, summarises the TDF and its development, and describes how to apply the TDF to achieve implementation objectives. Examples from the implementation research literature are presented to illustrate relevant methods and practical considerations. Methods Researchers from Canada, the UK and Australia attended a 3-day meeting in December 2012 to build an international collaboration among researchers and decision-makers interested in the advancing use of the TDF. The participants were experienced in using the TDF to assess implementation problems, design interventions, and/or understand change processes. This guide is an output of the meeting and also draws on the authors’ collective experience. Examples from the implementation research literature judged by authors to be representative of specific applications of the TDF are included in this guide. Results We explain and illustrate methods, with a focus on qualitative approaches, for selecting and specifying target behaviours key to implementation, selecting the study design, deciding the sampling strategy, developing study materials, collecting and analysing data, and reporting findings of TDF-based studies. Areas for development include methods for triangulating data, e.g. from interviews, questionnaires and observation and methods for designing interventions based on TDF-based problem analysis. Conclusions We offer this guide to the implementation community to assist in the application of the TDF to achieve implementation objectives. Benefits of using the TDF include the provision of a theoretical basis for implementation studies, good coverage of potential reasons for slow diffusion of evidence into practice and a method for progressing from theory-based investigation to intervention. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Serv Manage Res
                Health Serv Manage Res
                sphsm
                HSM
                Health Services Management Research
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                0951-4848
                1758-1044
                30 June 2022
                May 2023
                : 36
                : 2
                : 119-126
                Affiliations
                [1-09514848221107485]Department for Public Health, Health Services Research and HTA, universityUMIT - Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology; , Austria
                Author notes
                [*]Elisabeth Noehammer, Department for Public Health, Health Services Research and HTA, UMIT - Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnöfer-Zentrum 1, Hall in Tirol, Österreich 6060, Austria. Email: elisabeth.noehammer@ 123456umit-tirol.at
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0284-527X
                Article
                10.1177_09514848221107485
                10.1177/09514848221107485
                10080374
                35771177
                61698d62-3e40-4ba1-ac68-8b8797018558
                © The Author(s) 2022

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Funding
                Funded by: Tiroler Wissenschaftsfonds;
                Award ID: UNI-0404/1867
                Categories
                Primary Research
                Custom metadata
                ts10

                clinical guidelines,employees,evaluation,germany,europe,implementation

                Comments

                Comment on this article