Welcome to Implementation Science

Implementation research is the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices into routine practice, and, hence, to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services and care. This relatively new field includes the study of influences on healthcare professional and organisational behaviour. Implementation Science will encompass all aspects of research in this field, in clinical, community and policy contexts. This online journal will provide a unique platform for this type of research and will publish a broad range of articles – study protocols, debate, theoretical and conceptual articles, rigorous evaluations of the process of change, and articles on methodology and rigorously developed tools – that will enhance the development and refinement of implementation research. No one discipline, research design, or paradigm will be favoured. Implementation Science looks forward to receiving manuscripts that facilitate the continued development of the field, and contribute to healthcare policy and practice

Hospital quality reports in Germany: patient and physician opinion of the reported quality indicators

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Starting in 2005, Germany's health law required hospital quality reports to be published every two years by all acute care hospitals. The reports were intended to help patients and physicians make informed choices of hospitals. However, while establishing the quality indicators that form the content of the reports, the information needs of the target groups were not explicitly taken into account. Therefore, the aim of our study was to determine patient and physician opinion of the relevance of the reported quality indicators for choosing or referring to a hospital.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Convenience samples of 50 patients and 50 physicians were asked to rate the understandability (patients), suitability (physicians) and relevance (both groups) of a set of 29 quality indicators. The set was drawn from the reports (24 indicators) and supplemented by five indicators commonly used in hospital quality reports. We analysed the differences in patient and physician ratings of relevance of all indicators by applying descriptive statistics, t-tests and Wilcoxon tests.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Only three indicators were considered not understandable by the interviewed patients and unsuitable by the interviewed physicians. The patients rated 19 indicators as highly or very relevant, whereas the physicians chose 15 indicators. The most relevant indicator for the patients was "qualification of doctors", and for the physicians "volume of specified surgical procedures". Patient and physician rankings of individual indicators differed for 25 indicators. However, three groups of indicators could be differentiated, in which the relevance ratings of patients and physicians differed only within the groups. Four of the five indicators that were added to the existing set of reported indicators ranked in the first or second group ("kindness of staff", "patient satisfaction", "recommendation", and "distance to place of living").</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Most of the content of Germany's hospital quality reports seems to be useful for patients and physicians and influence their choice of hospitals. However, the target groups revealed that approximately one third of the indicators (mostly hospital structural characteristics), were not useful and hence could have been omitted from the reports. To enhance the usefulness of the reports, indicators on patient experiences should be added.</p

Many quality measurements, but few quality measures assessing the quality of breast cancer care in women: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer in women is increasingly frequent, and care is complex, onerous and expensive, all of which lend urgency to improvements in care. Quality measurement is essential to monitor effectiveness and to guide improvements in healthcare. METHODS: Ten databases, including Medline, were searched electronically to identify measures assessing the quality of breast cancer care in women (diagnosis, treatment, followup, documentation of care). Eligible studies measured adherence to standards of breast cancer care in women diagnosed with, or in treatment for, any histological type of adenocarcinoma of the breast. Reference lists of studies, review articles, web sites, and files of experts were searched manually. Evidence appraisal entailed dual independent assessments of data (e.g., indicators used in quality measurement). The extent of each quality indicator's scientific validation as a measure was assessed. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) was asked to contribute quality measures under development. RESULTS: Sixty relevant reports identified 58 studies with 143 indicators assessing adherence to quality breast cancer care. A paucity of validated indicators (n = 12), most of which assessed quality of life, only permitted a qualitative data synthesis. Most quality indicators evaluated processes of care. CONCLUSION: While some studies revealed patterns of under-use of care, all adherence data require confirmation using validated quality measures. ASCO's current development of a set of quality measures relating to breast cancer care may hold the key to conducting definitive studies

Quality of care for hypertension in the United States

BACKGROUND: Despite heavy recent emphasis on blood pressure (BP) control, many patients fail to meet widely accepted goals. While access and adherence to therapy certainly play a role, another potential explanation is poor quality of essential care processes (QC). Yet little is known about the relationship between QC and BP control. METHODS: We assessed QC in 12 U.S. communities by reviewing the medical records of a randomly selected group of patients for the two years preceding our study. We included patients with either a diagnosis of hypertension or two visits with BPs of ≥140/90 in their medical records. We used 28 process indicators based on explicit evidence to assess QC. The indicators covered a broad spectrum of care and were developed through a modified Delphi method. We considered patients who received all indicated care to have optimal QC. We defined control of hypertension as BP < 140/90 in the most recent reading. RESULTS: Of 1,953 hypertensive patients, only 57% received optimal care and 42% had controlled hypertension. Patients who had received optimal care were more likely to have their BP under control at the end of the study (45% vs. 35%, p = .0006). Patients were more likely to receive optimal care if they were over age 50 (76% vs. 63%, p < .0001), had diabetes (77% vs. 71%, p = .0038), coronary artery disease (87% vs. 69%, p < .0001), or hyperlipidemia (80% vs. 68%, p < .0001), and did not smoke (73% vs. 66%, p = .0005). CONCLUSIONS: Higher QC for hypertensive patients is associated with better BP control. Younger patients without cardiac risk factors are at greatest risk for poor care. Quality measurement systems like the one presented in this study can guide future quality improvement efforts

An analysis of clinical process measures for acute healthcare delivery in Appalachia: The Roane Medical Center experience

OBJECTIVE: To survey management of selected emergency healthcare needs in a Tennessee community hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this descriptive report, discharges and associated standard process measures were retrospectively studied for Roane Medical Center (RMC) in Harriman, Tennessee (pop. 6,757). Hospital data were extracted from a nationwide database of short-term acute care hospitals to measure 16 quality performance measures in myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, and pneumonia during the 14 month interval ending March 2005. The data also permitted comparisons with state and national reference groups. RESULTS: Of RMC patients with myocardial infarction (MI), 94% received aspirin on arrival, a figure higher than both state (85%) and national (91%) averages. Assessment of left ventricular dysfunction among heart failure patients was also higher at RMC (98%) than the state (74%) or national (79%) average. For RMC pneumonia patients, 79% received antibiotics within 4 h of admission, which compared favorably with State (76%) and national (75%) average. RMC scored higher on 13 of 16 clinical process measures (p<0.01, sign test analysis, >95% CI) compared to state and national averages. DISCUSSION: Although acute health care needs are often met with limited resources in medically underserved regions, RMC performed above state and national average for most process measures assessed in this review. Our data were derived from one facility and the associated findings may not be applicable in other healthcare settings. Further studies are planned to track other parameters and specific clinical outcomes at RMC, as well as to identify specific institutional policies that facilitate attainment of target quality measures

Underutilization of information and knowledge in everyday medical practice: Evaluation of a computer-based solution

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The medical history is acknowledged as the <it>sine qua non </it>for quality medical care because recognizing problems is pre-requisite for managing them. Medical histories typically are incomplete and inaccurate, however. We show here that computers are a solution to this issue of information gathering about patients. Computers can be programmed to acquire more complete medical histories with greater detail across a range of acute and chronic issues than physician histories.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Histories were acquired by physicians in the usual way and by a computer program interacting directly with patients. Decision-making of what medical issues were queried by computer were made internally by the software, including determination of the chief complaint. The selection of patients was from admissions to the Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany by convenience sampling. Physician-acquired and computer-acquired histories were compared on a patient-by-patient basis for 45 patients.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The computer histories reported 160 problems not recorded in physician histories or slightly more than 3.5 problems per patient. However, physicians but not the computer reported 13 problems. The data show that computer histories reported problems across a range of organ systems, that the problems detected by computer but not physician histories were both acute and chronic and that the computer histories detected a significant number of issues important for preventing further morbidity.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A combination of physician and computer-acquired histories, in non-emergent situations, with the latter available to the physician at the time he or she sees the patient, is a far superior method for collecting historical data than the physician interview alone.</p

System-Agnostic Clinical Decision Support Services: Benefits and Challenges for Scalable Decision Support

System-agnostic clinical decision support (CDS) services provide patient evaluation capabilities that are independent of specific CDS systems and system implementation contexts. While such system-agnostic CDS services hold great potential for facilitating the widespread implementation of CDS systems, little has been described regarding the benefits and challenges of their use. In this manuscript, the authors address this need by describing potential benefits and challenges of using a system-agnostic CDS service. This analysis is based on the authors’ formal assessments of, and practical experiences with, various approaches to developing, implementing, and maintaining CDS capabilities. In particular, the analysis draws on the authors’ experience developing and leveraging a system-agnostic CDS Web service known as SEBASTIAN. A primary potential benefit of using a system-agnostic CDS service is the relative ease and flexibility with which the service can be leveraged to implement CDS capabilities across applications and care settings. Other important potential benefits include facilitation of centralized knowledge management and knowledge sharing; the potential to support multiple underlying knowledge representations and knowledge resources through a common service interface; improved simplicity and componentization; easier testing and validation; and the enabling of distributed CDS system development. Conversely, important potential challenges include the increased effort required to develop knowledge resources capable of being used in many contexts and the critical need to standardize the service interface. Despite these challenges, our experiences to date indicate that the benefits of using a system-agnostic CDS service generally outweigh the challenges of using this approach to implementing and maintaining CDS systems