Identification of promising strategies to sustain improvements in hospital practice: a qualitative case study

BMC Health Services Research

Trudy van der Weijden²  Maarten F von Meyenfeldt³  Carmen D Dirksen¹  José MC Maessen⁴  Albine Moser⁴  Freek Gillissen¹  Stephanie MC Ament¹ 

[1] Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, KEMTA, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, 6202, AZ, the Netherlands;Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, 6200, MD, The Netherlands;Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, 6202, AZ, The Netherlands;Faculty of Care & Nursing, Zuyd University, Heerlen, 6400, AN, The Netherlands

关键词: Strategies;    Quality improvement collaborative;    Enhanced recovery after surgery programme;    Sustainability;   

Others  :  1090040
DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-014-0641-y

 received in 2014-06-24, accepted in 2014-12-08,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

A quality improvement collaborative is an intensive project involving a combination of implementation strategies applied in a limited “breakthrough” time window. After an implementation project, it is generally difficult to sustain its success. In the current study, sustainability was described as maintaining an implemented innovation and its benefits over a longer period of time after the implementation project has ended. The aim of the study was to explore potentially promising strategies for sustaining the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme in colonic surgery as perceived by professionals, three to six years after the hospital had successfully finished a quality improvement collaborative.

Methods

A qualitative case study was performed to identify promising strategies to sustain key outcome variables related to the ERAS programme in terms of adherence, time needed for functional recovery and hospital length of stay (LOS), as achieved immediately after implementation. Ten hospitals were selected which had successfully implemented the ERAS programme in colonic surgery (2006–2009), with success defined as a median LOS of 6 days or less and protocol adherence rates above 70%. Fourteen semi-structured interviews were held with eighteen key participants of the care process three to six years after implementation, starting with the project leader in every hospital. The interviews started by confronting them with the level of sustained implementation results. A direct content analysis with an inductive coding approach was used to identify promising strategies. The mean duration of the interviews was 37 minutes (min 26 minutes – max 51 minutes).

Results

The current study revealed strategies targeting professionals and the organisation. They comprised internal audit and feedback on outcomes, small-scale educational booster meetings, reminders, changing the physical structure of the organisation, changing the care process, making work agreements and delegating responsibility, and involving a coordinator. A multifaceted self-driven promising strategy was applied in most hospitals, and in most hospitals promising strategies were suggested to sustain the ERAS programme.

Conclusions

Joining a quality improvement collaborative may not be enough to achieve long-term normalisation of transformed care, and additional investments may be needed. The findings suggest that certain post-implementation strategies are valuable in sustaining implementation successes achieved after joining a quality improvement collaborative.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Ament et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Schouten LM, Hulscher ME, van Everdingen JJ, Huijsman R, Grol RP: Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review. BMJ 2008, 336(7659):1491-1494.
• [2]Ayers LR, Beyea SC, Godfrey MM, Harper DC, Nelson EC, Batalden PB: Quality improvement learning collaboratives. Qual Manag Health Care 2005, 14(4):234-247.
• [3]NHS: Sustainability and its relationship with spread and adoption, General improvement skills. In: NIFIA Improvement, Editor. Vol. Coventry; 2007.
• [4]Gruen RL, Elliott JH, Nolan ML, Lawton PD, Parkhill A, McLaren CJ, Lavis JN: Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning. Lancet 2008, 372(9649):1579-1589.
• [5]Greenhalgh T, Macfarlane F, Barton-Sweeney C, Woodard F: “If we build it, will it stay?” A case study of the sustainability of whole-system change in London. Milbank Q 2012, 90(3):516-547.
• [6]Wiltsey Stirman S, Kimberly J, Cook N, Calloway A, Castro F, Charns M: The sustainability of new programs and innovations: a review of the empirical literature and recommendations for future research. Implement Sci: IS 2012, 7:17. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Scheirer MA: Is Sustainability Possible? A Review and Commentary on Empirical Studies of Program Sustainability. Am J Eval 2005, 26(3):27.
• [8]Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR: Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res 1998, 13(1):87-108.
• [9]Institute N: Sustainability and its Relationship with Spread and Adoption. NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement, In Coventry; 2007.
• [10]Ament SM, Gillissen F, Maessen JM, Dirksen CD, van der Weijden T, von Meyenfeldt MF: Sustainability of healthcare innovations (SUSHI): long term effects of two implemented surgical care programmes (protocol). BMC Health Serv Res 2012, 12:423. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Hoomans T, Ament AJHA, Evers SMAA, Severens JL: Implementing guidelines into clinical practice: what is the value? J Eval Clin Pract 2011, 17(4):606-614.
• [12]Doyle C, Howe C, Woodcock T, Myron R, Phekoo K, McNicholas C, Saffer J, Bell D: Making change last: applying the NHS institute for innovation and improvement sustainability model to healthcare improvement. Implement Sci 2013, 8(1):127. BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Kehlet H, Mogensen T: Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Br J Surg 1999, 86(2):227-230.
• [14]Basse L, Hjort Jakobsen D, Billesbolle P, Werner M, Kehlet H: A clinical pathway to accelerate recovery after colonic resection. Ann Surg 2000, 232(1):51-57.
• [15]Basse L, Raskov HH, Hjort Jakobsen D, Sonne E, Billesbolle P, Hendel HW, Rosenberg J, Kehlet H: Accelerated postoperative recovery programme after colonic resection improves physical performance, pulmonary function and body composition. Br J Surg 2002, 89(4):446-453.
• [16]Basse L, Thorbol JE, Lossl K, Kehlet H: Colonic surgery with accelerated rehabilitation or conventional care. Dis Colon Rectum 2004, 47(3):271-277. discussion 277–278
• [17]Kehlet H, Wilmore DW: Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome. Am J Surg 2002, 183(6):630-641.
• [18]Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH, Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN: The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 2010, 29(4):434-440.
• [19]Adamina M, Kehlet H, Tomlinson GA, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP: Enhanced recovery pathways optimize health outcomes and resource utilization: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in colorectal surgery. Surgery 2011, 149(6):830-840.
• [20]Sammour T, Zargar-Shoshtari K, Bhat A, Kahokehr A, Hill AG: A programme of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a cost-effective intervention in elective colonic surgery. N Z Med J 2010, 123(1319):61-70.
• [21]Maessen J, Dejong CH, Hausel J, Nygren J, Lassen K, Andersen J, Kessels AG, Revhaug A, Kehlet H, Ljungqvist O, Fearon KC, von Meyenfeldt MF: A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg 2007, 94(2):224-231.
• [22]Gillissen F, Hoff C, Maessen JM, Winkens B, Teeuwen JH, von Meyenfeldt MF, Dejong CH: Structured synchronous implementation of an enhanced recovery program in elective colonic surgery in 33 hospitals in The Netherlands. World J Surg 2013, 37(5):1082-1093.
• [23]Coolsen MM, Wong-Lun-Hing EM, van Dam RM, van der Wilt AA, Slim K, Lassen K, Dejong CH: A systematic review of outcomes in patients undergoing liver surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. HPB: Off J Int Hepatol Pancreatol Biliary Assoc 2013, 15(4):245-251.
• [24]Lv D, Wang X, Shi G: Perioperative enhanced recovery programmes for gynaecological cancer patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010., 6
• [25]Gillissen F, Ament SM, Maessen JM, Dejong CH, Dirksen CD, van der Weijden T, von Meyenfeldt MF: Sustainability of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program (ERAS) in Colonic Surgery. World J surg 2014.
• [26]Yin RK: Case Study Research: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications; 2003.
• [27]Stake RE: The Art of Case Study Research. SAGE Publications; 1995.
• [28]Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A: The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11(1):100. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Tricco AC, Cogo E, Ashoor H, Perrier L, McKibbon KA, Grimshaw JM, Straus SE: Sustainability of knowledge translation interventions in healthcare decision-making: protocol for a scoping review. BMJ Open 2013, 3(5).
• [30]Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 2003, 362(9391):1225-1230.
• [31]Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group: Data Collection Checklist. In. Ontario: Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa; 2011
• [32]Hsieh HF, Shannon SE: Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005, 15(9):1277-1288.
• [33]Ulin PRR, Robinson ET, Tolley EE: Qualitative Methods in Public Health, A Field Guide for Applied Research. A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco; 2005.
• [34]van den Hoonaard W: Working with Sensitizing Concepts: Analytical Field Research: Thousand Oaks; 1997.
• [35]Lincoln YSGE: Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications Inc, Newbury Park, CA; 1985.
• [36]Hulscher ME, Schouten LM, Grol RP, Buchan H: Determinants of success of quality improvement collaboratives: what does the literature show? BMJ Qual Saf 2013, 22(1):19-31.
• [37]Knott A, Pathak S, McGrath JS, Kennedy R, Horgan A, Mythen M, Carter F, Francis NK: Consensus views on implementation and measurement of enhanced recovery after surgery in England: Delphi study. BMJ Open 2012, 2(6).
• [38]Maessen J: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Fact or Fiction?. Maastricht University, Maastricht; 2009.
• [39]Ovretveit J, Bate P, Cleary P, Cretin S, Gustafson D, McInnes K, McLeod H, Molfenter T, Plsek P, Robert G, Shortell S, Wilson T: Quality collaboratives: lessons from research. Qual Safety Health Care 2002, 11(4):345-351.
• [40]Pettigrew A, Ferlie E, McKee L: Shaping strategic change ‐ The case of the NHS in the 1980s. Public Money Manag 1992, 12(3):27-31.
• [41]Damschroder L, Aron D, Keith R, Kirsh S, Alexander J, Lowery J: Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci 2009, 4(1):50. BioMed Central Full Text
• [42]Vos L, Duckers ML, Wagner C, van Merode GG: Applying the quality improvement collaborative method to process redesign: a multiple case study. Implement Sci: IS 2010, 5:19. BioMed Central Full Text
• [43]ERAS Society [http://www.erassociety.org/]
• [44]Benzer JK, Beehler S, Cramer IE, Mohr DC, Charns MP, Burgess JF Jr: Between and within-site variation in qualitative implementation research. Implement Sci: IS 2013, 8:4. BioMed Central Full Text