Barriers and Facilitators to High-Volume Evidence-Based Innovation and Implementation in a Large, Community-Based Learning Health System

Author:

Durojaiye Cimone1,Prausnitz Stephanie1,Schneider Jennifer L.1,Lieu Tracy A.1,Schmittdiel Julie A.1,Rouillard Smita2,Chen Yi-Fen2,Lee Kristine2,Corley Douglas A.1

Affiliation:

1. Kaiser Permanente Northern California

2. The Permanente Medical Group

Abstract

Abstract

Background Broad-scale, rapid health care change is critically needed to improve value-based, effective health care. Health care providers and systems need to address common barriers and facilitators across the evidence to implementation pathway, across diverse specialties. However, most evidence translation / implementation research evaluates single topic areas, and may be of limited value for informing comprehensive efforts. This project’s objective was to identify, characterize, and illustrate common trans-topic facilitators and barriers of translating new health care evidence results to clinical implementation across multiple medical specialties. Methods This study was an evaluation of all evidence-based innovation projects completed during 2019–2021. Each project was created with medical group clinical leaders and was intended to inform clinical care. The evaluation took place in a large community-based integrated health care system, and an embedded delivery science and applied research program. Clinical investigators, scientific investigators, and clinical operational leaders received structured questionnaires regarding barriers and facilitators for the operational implementation of new research findings for each project. Responses were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify perceived implementation barriers and facilitators. Results All 48 projects completed between 2019–2021 were evaluated; responses were received for 45 (94%) and 34 had comments mappable to framework domains. Potential barriers and facilitators to clinical implementation of new research results were identified across all five framework domains and, within these, the 38 constructs or sub-constructs. Among 245 total comments, the most commonly cited facilitators were how the new research evidence generated compelled change (n = 29), specialty communication networks for disseminating results and initiating change (n = 20), leadership engagement in the project (n = 19), and the innovation’s relative advantage over existing practices (n = 11). The most commonly cited barriers were inadequate resource commitment for next-step implementation (n = 15), insufficient learning/implementation culture (n = 5), and insufficient individual-level willingness/ability for change (n = 5). Conclusions A novel large-scale evaluation of barriers and facilitators across the evidence to implementation pathway identified common factors across multiple topic areas and specialties. These common potentially replicable facilitators and modifiable barriers can focus health systems and leaders pursuing large-volume evidence-to-implementation initiatives on those areas with the likely greatest benefit-for-effort, for accelerating health care change.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference40 articles.

1. Ten years of implementation outcome research: a scoping review protocol;Lengnick-Hall R;BMJ Open,2021

2. Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Evidence-Based. M. In: Olsen L, Aisner D, McGinnis JM, eds. The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary. National Academies Press (US) Copyright © 2007, National Academy of Sciences.; 2007.

3. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research;Morris ZS;J R Soc Med Dec,2011

4. Tu T, Muhlestein D, Kocot S, Lawrence, White R. The Impact of Accountable Care: Origins and Future of Accountable Care Organzations. Report. 2015. 2015. Accessed 18 Apr 2024. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/impact-of-accountable-careorigins-052015.pdf.

5. Quantitative approaches for the evaluation of implementation research studies;Smith JD;Psychiatry Res Jan,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3