hh.sePublications
Planned maintenance
A system upgrade is planned for 24/9-2024, at 12:00-14:00. During this time DiVA will be unavailable.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Conceptualising interventions to enhance spread in complex systems: a multisite comprehensive medication review case study
Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8991-1702
Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Show others and affiliations
2022 (English)In: BMJ Quality and Safety, ISSN 2044-5415, E-ISSN 2044-5423, Vol. 31, no 1, p. 31-44Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Advancing the description and conceptualisation of interventions in complex systems is necessary to support spread, evaluation, attribution and reproducibility. Improvement teams can provide unique insight into how interventions are operationalised in practice. Capturing this 'insider knowledge' has the potential to enhance intervention descriptions.

Objectives: This exploratory study investigated the spread of a comprehensive medication review (CMR) intervention to (1) describe the work required from the improvement team perspective, (2) identify what stays the same and what changes between the different sites and why, and (3) critically appraise the 'hard core' and 'soft periphery' (HC/SP) construct as a way of conceptualising interventions.

Design: A prospective case study of a CMR initiative across five sites. Data collection included: observations, document analysis and semistructured interviews. A facilitated workshop triangulated findings and measured perceived effort invested in activities. A qualitative database was developed to conduct thematic analysis.

Results: Sites identified 16 intervention components. All were considered essential due to their interdependency. The function of components remained the same, but adaptations were made between and within sites. Components were categorised under four 'spheres of operation': Accessibility of evidence base; Process of enactment; Dependent processes and Dependent sociocultural issues. Participants reported most effort was invested on 'dependent sociocultural issues'. None of the existing HC/SP definitions fit well with the empirical data, with inconsistent classifications of components as HC or SP.

Conclusions: This study advances the conceptualisation of interventions by explicitly considering how evidence-based practices are operationalised in complex systems. We propose a new conceptualisation of 'interventions-in-systems' which describes intervention components in relation to their: proximity to the evidence base; component interdependence; component function; component adaptation and effort. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2022. Vol. 31, no 1, p. 31-44
Keywords [en]
breakthrough groups, clinical practice guidelines, collaborative, complexity, healthcare quality improvement, implementation science
National Category
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-46016DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012367ISI: 000726951400001PubMedID: 33990462Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85106186171OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-46016DiVA, id: diva2:1616727
Note

Funding: This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Northwest London (CLAHRC NWL), now recommissioned as NIHR Applied Research Collaboration NWL (ARC NWL). The research team also acknowledges the support of the NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN). JR was also funded by a Health Foundation Improvement Science Fellowship.

Available from: 2021-12-03 Created: 2021-12-03 Last updated: 2022-01-31Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Reed, Julie

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lennox, LauraReed, Julie
By organisation
School of Health and Welfare
In the same journal
BMJ Quality and Safety
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 35 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf