24 research outputs found

    Project management principles for optimizing publication productivity of mixed methods studies

    Get PDF
    Abstract: Mixed methods research is increasingly valued, although little attention has been placed on how to execute such projects well to achieve optimal publication for impact. Multiple publications from a single study allow scholars to explicate findings that cannot be contained in a single article and which address different aspects of study findings. This article contributes to the fields of mixed methods research by building on their roots in pragmatism, which we argue calls for effective research studies resulting in published findings. This article proposes a project management framework and describes how to optimize mixed methods manuscript production during each of 5 research phases. We describe lessons learned from project management and implementation of our own mixed methods projects to help research teams build quality projects with optimal publication outputs and impact

    Building patient participation in quality of care through the healthcare stories project: A demonstration program in New York State HIV clinics

    Get PDF
    There is growing recognition that patients should play a central role in defining, assessing, and improving the quality of healthcare, thereby enhancing patient experiences. Healthcare organizations struggle to meet these goals, which require becoming more patient-centered and patient-involved. The Healthcare Stories Project (HCSP), a demonstration program of the NYS Department of Health AIDS Institute, aimed to address this. HCSP comprises three, stepwise activities to: 1) Capture how patients define and experience ‘quality of care’ in the clinic; 2) Engage patients and providers as equal partners in understanding and improving the quality of care; and through partnerships, 3) Support the building of a coproduced healthcare system. After reviewing HCSP and its rollout in New York HIV outpatient settings, we describe a qualitative process evaluation, consisting of interviews at two time points with implementing organizations (N=12, 11). Each activity offered an opportunity to share ideas and experiences of quality of care, generating concrete improvement project ideas. Activities strengthened patient involvement by engaging consumer advisory boards, and staff not traditionally involved in quality. While designed to be implemented with HIV patients, organizations implemented Activity Two and Three with broader populations. Organizations had the hardest time implementing Activity Three that focused on the coproduction concept, but they none the less applied and strengthened coproduced healthcare during Activities One and Two. Overall, HCSP is a promising model to advance patient-centered and patient-partnered quality of care, better understanding patient experiences and acting with patients to develop practical improvements and a more coproduced healthcare system. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Quality & Clinical Excellence lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework). Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens

    The value of theory in programmes to implement clinical guidelines: Insights from a retrospective mixed-methods evaluation of a programme to increase adherence to national guidelines for chronic disease in primary care.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Programmes have had limited success in improving guideline adherence for chronic disease. Use of theory is recommended but is often absent in programmes conducted in 'real-world' rather than research settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This mixed-methods study tested a retrospective theory-based approach to evaluate a 'real-world' programme in primary care to improve adherence to national guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Qualitative data, comprising analysis of documents generated throughout the programme (n>300), in-depth interviews with planners (clinicians, managers and improvement experts involved in devising, planning, and implementing the programme, n = 14) and providers (practice clinicians, n = 14) were used to construct programme theories, experiences of implementation and contextual factors influencing care. Quantitative analyses comprised controlled before-and-after analyses to test 'early' and evolved' programme theories with comparators grounded in each theory. 'Early' theory predicted the programme would reduce emergency hospital admissions (EHA). It was tested using national analysis of standardized borough-level EHA rates between programme and comparator boroughs. 'Evolved' theory predicted practices with higher programme participation would increase guideline adherence and reduce EHA and costs. It was tested using a difference-in-differences analysis with linked primary and secondary care data to compare changes in diagnosis, management, EHA and costs, over time and by programme participation. RESULTS: Contrary to programme planners' predictions in 'early' and 'evolved' programme theories, admissions did not change following the programme. However, consistent with 'evolved' theory, higher guideline adoption occurred in practices with greater programme participation. CONCLUSIONS: Retrospectively constructing theories based on the ideas of programme planners can enable evaluators to address some limitations encountered when evaluating programmes without a theoretical base. Prospectively articulating theory aided by existing models and mid-range implementation theories may strengthen guideline adoption efforts by prompting planners to scrutinise implementation methods. Benefits of deriving programme theory, with or without the aid of mid-range implementation theories, however, may be limited when the evidence underpinning guidelines is flawed

    Variation in quality of acute stroke care by day and time of admission: prospective cohort study of weekday and weekend centralised hyperacute stroke unit care and non-centralised services.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate variations in quality of acute stroke care and outcomes by day and time of admission in London hyperacute stroke units compared with the rest of England. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using anonymised patient-level data from the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme. SETTING: Acute stroke services in London hyperacute stroke units and the rest of England. PARTICIPANTS: 68 239 patients with a primary diagnosis of stroke admitted between January and December 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Hub-and-spoke model for care of suspected acute stroke patients in London with performance standards designed to deliver uniform access to high-quality hyperacute stroke unit care across the week. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 16 indicators of quality of acute stroke care, mortality at 3 days after admission to the hospital, disability at the end of the inpatient spell, length of stay. RESULTS: There was no variation in quality of care by day and time of admission to the hospital across the week in terms of stroke nursing assessment, brain scanning and thrombolysis in London hyperacute stroke units, nor was there variation in 3-day mortality or disability at hospital discharge (all p values>0.05). Other quality of care measures significantly varied by day and time of admission across the week in London (all p values0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The London hyperacute stroke unit model achieved performance standards for 'front door' stroke care across the week. The same benefits were not achieved by other models of care in the rest of England. There was no weekend effect for mortality in London or the rest of the England. Other aspects of care were not constant across the week in London hyperacute stroke units, indicating some performance standards were perceived to be more important than others

    What does it take to provide clinical interventions with temporal consistency? A qualitative study of London hyperacute stroke units.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: Seven-day working in hospitals is a current priority of international health research and policy. Previous research has shown variability in delivering evidence-based clinical interventions across different times of day and week. We aimed to identify factors influencing such variations in London hyperacute stroke units (HASUs). DESIGN: Interview and observation study to explain patterns of variation in delivery and outcomes of care described in a quantitative partner paper (Melnychuk et al). SETTING: Eight HASUs in London. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed HASU staff (n=76), including doctors, nurses, therapists and administrators. We also conducted non-participant observations of delivery of care at different times of the day and week (n=45; ~102 hours). We analysed the data for thematic content relating to the ability of staff to provide evidence-based interventions consistently at different times of the day and week. RESULTS: Staff were able to deliver 'front door' interventions consistently by taking on additional responsibilities out of hours (eg, deciding eligibility for thrombolysis); creating continuities between day and night (through, eg, governance processes and staggering rotas); building trusting relationships with, eg, Radiology and Emergency Departments and staff prioritisation of 'front door' interventions. Variations by time of day resulted from reduced staffing in HASUs and elsewhere in hospitals in the evenings and at the weekend. Variations by day of week (eg, weekend effect) resulted from lack of therapy input and difficulties repatriating patients at weekends, and associated increases in pressure on Fridays and Mondays. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based service standards can facilitate 7-day working in acute stroke services. Standards should ensure that the capacity and capabilities required for 'front door' interventions are available 24/7, while other services, for example, therapies are available every day of the week. The impact of standards is influenced by interdependencies between HASUs, other hospital services and social services

    Immediate initiation of antiretroviral treatment: knowledge, attitudes, and practices among clinic staff in New York City

    No full text
    Abstract Background Immediate initiation of antiretroviral treatment (iART) is a proven intervention that significantly decreases time to viral suppression and increases patient retention. iART involves starting medication as early as possible, often after a reactive rapid HIV test or re-engagement in care, although it does not have a universal definition. We aimed to understand iART from an implementation science perspective in a wide range of New York City (NYC) clinics providing HIV primary care, including staff knowledge, attitudes, and practices, as well as clinic barriers and facilitators to iART. Methods We used a mixed-methods, convergent study design, with a quantitative survey and in-depth interview (IDI), to understand individual-level knowledge, attitudes, and practices, as well as clinic-level barriers and facilitators to iART. We recruited at least one medical and non-medical staff member from a diverse purposive sample of 30 NYC clinics. In quantitative analyses, we used separate binomial logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). In qualitative analyses, we used codebooks created by thematic analyses structured using a Framework Model to develop descriptive analytic memos. Results Recruited staff completed 46 surveys and 17 IDIs. We found high levels of awareness of the viral suppression and retention in care benefits of iART. Survey respondents more commonly reported medication starts within three to four days of a reactive rapid HIV test rather than same-day initiation. Among survey respondents, compared to medical staff, non-medical staff were more likely to agree that medication should only be initiated after receiving confirmatory HIV test results (OR: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.06–0.8). Additionally, survey respondents from clinics serving a majority people of color were less likely to report iART on the same day as a reactive rapid HIV test (OR: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.02–1.0, p-value < 0.5). IDI results elucidated barriers to implementation, including perceived patient readiness, which potentially leads to added disparities in iART access. Conclusion iART has proven benefits and support for its implementation among HIV clinic staff. Our findings indicate that barriers to expanding iART access may be overcome if implementation resources are allocated strategically, which can further progress towards health equity

    School-based vaccination programmes:a systematic review of the evidence on organisation and delivery in high income countries

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Many countries have recently expanded their childhood immunisation programmes. Schools are an increasingly attractive setting for delivery of these new immunisations because of their ability to reach large numbers of children in a short period of time. However, there are organisational challenges to delivery of large-scale vaccination programmes in schools. Understanding the facilitators and barriers is important for improving the delivery of future school-based vaccination programmes. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of evidence on school-based vaccination programmes in order to understand the influence of organisational factors on the delivery of programmes. Our eligibility criteria were studies that (1) focused on childhood or adolescent vaccination programmes delivered in schools; (2) considered organisational factors that influenced the preparation or delivery of programmes; (3) were conducted in a developed or high-income country; and (4) had been peer reviewed. We searched for articles published in English between 2000 and 2015 using MEDLINE and HMIC electronic databases. Additional studies were identified by searching the Cochrane Library and bibliographies. We extracted data from the studies, assessed quality and the risk of bias, and categorised findings using a thematic framework of eight organisational factors. RESULTS: We found that most of the recent published literature is from the United States and is concerned with the delivery of pandemic or seasonal flu vaccination programmes at a regional (state) or local level. We found that the literature is largely descriptive and not informed by the use of theory. Despite this, we identified common factors that influence the implementation of programmes. These factors included programme leadership and governance, organisational models and institutional relationships, workforce capacity and roles particularly concerning the school nurse, communication with parents and students, including methods for obtaining consent, and clinic organisation and delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time that information has been brought together on the organisational factors influencing the delivery of vaccination programmes in school-based settings. An understanding of these factors, underpinned by robust theory-informed research, may help policy-makers and managers design and deliver better programmes. We identified several gaps in the research literature to propose a future research agenda, informed by theories of implementation and organisational change

    Diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy: Perceptions of patients and providers

    No full text
    The aim of the present study was to explore perceptions and strategies of health care providers regarding diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy (LHL), and to compare their self-management support with the needs of patients with LHL and type 2 diabetes. This study serves as a problem analysis for systematic intervention development to improve diabetes self-management among patients with LHL. This qualitative study used in-depth interviews with general practitioners (n = 4), nurse practitioners (n = 5), and patients with LHL (n = 31). The results of the interviews with health care providers guided the patient interviews. In addition, we observed 10 general practice consultations. Providers described patients with LHL as uninvolved and less motivated patients who do not understand self-management. Their main strategy to improve self-management was to provide standard information on a repeated basis. Patients with LHL seemed to have a different view of diabetes self-management than their providers. Most demonstrated a low awareness of what self-management involves, but did not express needing more information. They reported several practical barriers to self-management, although they seemed reluctant to use the information provided to overcome them. Providing and repeating information does not fit the needs of patients with LHL regarding diabetes self-management support. Health care providers do not seem to have the insight or the tools to systematically support diabetes self-management in this group. Systematic intervention development with a focus on skills-based approaches rather than cognition development may improve diabetes self-management support of patients with LH
    corecore