Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol

Implementation Science

Carl R May³  Ian Nicholas Steen⁵  Elaine McColl⁵  Shaun Treweek⁴  Elizabeth Murray²  Frances S Mair¹  Melissa Girling⁵  Tim Rapley⁵  Tracy L Finch⁵ 

[1] Institute of Health and WellBeing, University of Glasgow, 1 Horselethill Road, Glasgow, G12 9LX, UK;Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, Upper Floor 3, Royal Free Hospital, Rowland Hill Street, London, NW3 2PF, UK;Faculty of Health Sciences, Building 67, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK;Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, 3rd Floor, Health Sciences Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK;Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE2 4AX, UK

关键词: Complex interventions;    Instrument development;    Survey;    Implementation process;    NPT;    Normalization process theory;   

Others  :  813708
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-8-43

 received in 2013-02-07, accepted in 2013-04-08,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Understanding implementation processes is key to ensuring that complex interventions in healthcare are taken up in practice and thus maximize intended benefits for service provision and (ultimately) care to patients. Normalization Process Theory (NPT) provides a framework for understanding how a new intervention becomes part of normal practice. This study aims to develop and validate simple generic tools derived from NPT, to be used to improve the implementation of complex healthcare interventions.

Objectives

The objectives of this study are to: develop a set of NPT-based measures and formatively evaluate their use for identifying implementation problems and monitoring progress; conduct preliminary evaluation of these measures across a range of interventions and contexts, and identify factors that affect this process; explore the utility of these measures for predicting outcomes; and develop an online users’ manual for the measures.

Methods

A combination of qualitative (workshops, item development, user feedback, cognitive interviews) and quantitative (survey) methods will be used to develop NPT measures, and test the utility of the measures in six healthcare intervention settings.

Discussion

The measures developed in the study will be available for use by those involved in planning, implementing, and evaluating complex interventions in healthcare and have the potential to enhance the chances of their implementation, leading to sustained changes in working practices.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Finch et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Pope C: Resisting evidence: the study of evidence-based medicine as a contemporary social movement. Health 2003, 7(3):267-282.
• [2]Whitten P, Collins B: The diffusion of telemedicine: communicating an innovation. Sci Commun 1997, 19(1):21-40.
• [3]Kuhlmann E, Burau V: The ‘healthcare state’ in transition - national and international contexts of changing professional governance. Eur Soc 2008, 10(4):619-633.
• [4]Woolf SH: The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA 2008, 299(2):211-213.
• [5]Grol RPTM, Bosch MC, Hulscher MEJL: Planning and studying improvement in patient care: the use of theoretical perspectives. Milbank Q 2007, 85(1):93-138.
• [6]Rogers EM: The diffusion of innovation. 4th edition. New York: Free Press; 1995.
• [7]Webster A: Health, technology and society: a sociological critique. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2007.
• [8]Rogers EM: A prospective and retrospective look at the diffusion model. J Health Commun 2004, 9:13-19.
• [9]Presseau J, Sniehotta FF, Francis JJ, Campbell NC: Multiple goals and time constraints: perceived impact on physicians’ performance of evidence-based behaviours. Implement Sci 2009, 4:77. BioMed Central Full Text
• [10]May C: A rational model for assessing and evaluating complex interventions in health care. BMC Health Serv Res 2006, 6:86. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]May C, Mair F, Finch T, MacFarlane A, Dowrick C, Treweek S, Rapley T, Ballini L, Ong BN, Rogers A, Murray E, Elwyn G, Légaré F, Gunn J, Montori V: Development of a theory of implementation and integration: normalization process theory. Implement Sci 2009., 4(29) BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]May C, Finch T: Implementing, integrating and embedding practices: an outline of normalization process theory. Sociology 2009, 43(3):535-54.
• [13]May C, Finch T, Mair F: Understanding the implementation of complex interventions in health care: the normalization process model. BMC Health Serv Res 2007., 7(148) BioMed Central Full Text
• [14]May CR, Mair FS, Dowrick CF: Process evaluation for complex interventions in primary care: understanding trials using the normalization process model. BMC Fam Pract 2007., 8 BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]May C, Finch T, Cornford J: Integrating telecare for chronic disease management in the community: what needs to be done?. London: NIHR; 2010.
• [16]Mair F, May C, Murray E: Understanding the implementation and integration of E-health services. London: National Co-ordinating Centre for the National Institute for Health Research Service Delivery and Organisation Programme (NCCSDO); 2009.
• [17]Mair F, May C, O’Donnell C: Factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of e-health systems: an explanatory systematic review. Bulletin World Health Organisation 2012, 90(5):357-364.
• [18]Gunn J, Kokanovic R, Palmer V: Re-organising the care of depression and other related disorders in the Australian primary health care setting. Canberra: Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute; 2009.
• [19]Pencille LJ, Campbell ME, Van Houten HK: Protocol for the osteoporosis choice trial. A pilot randomized trial of a decision aid in primary care practice. Trials 2009, 10:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [20]Elwyn GLF, van der Weijden T, Edwards A, May C: Arduous implementation: does the normalisation process model explain why it’s so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice? Implement Sci 2008, 3:57. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Finch T, Mair F, O’Donnell C: From theory to ‘measurement’ in complex interventions: methodological lessons from the development of an e-health normalisation instrument. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012, 12(1):69. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Murray EMC, Mair F: Development and formative evaluation of the e-health implementation toolkit (e-HIT). BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2010, 10(1):61. BioMed Central Full Text
• [23]May C, Finch T, Ballini L: Evaluating complex interventions and health technologies using normalization process theory: development of a simplified approach and web-enabled toolkit. BMC Health Serv Res 2011, 11(1):245. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C: Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med 2010, 8(1):63. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]MacFarlane A, O’Donnell C, Mair F: REsearch into implementation STrategies to support patients of different ORigins and language background in a variety of European primary care settings (RESTORE): study protocol. Implement Sci 2012, 7(1):111. BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Snyder RA, Fields WL: Measuring hospital readiness for information technology(IT) innovation: a multisite study of the organizational information technology innovation readiness scale. J Nurs Meas 2006, 14(1):45-55.
• [27]Willis GB, Lessler JT: Guidelines for designing and evaluating questionnaires. Rockville, MD: Research Triangle Institute; 1999.
• [28]Lessler JT, Forsyth BH: A coding system for appraising questionnaires. In Answering questions: methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research. Edited by Schwarz N, Sudman S. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1996:389-402.
• [29]Graesser A, Wiemer-hastings K, Kreuz R: QUAID: a questionnaire evaluation aid for survey methodologists. Behav Res Methods 2000, 32(2):254-62.
• [30]Willis GB: Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. California: Sage Publications Inc.; 2005.
• [31]Knafl K, Deatrick J, Gallo A: The analysis and interpretation of cognitive interviews for instrument development. Res Nurs Health 2007, 30(2):224-234.
• [32]Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M: Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009., (3) Art. No.: MR000008
• [33]Nunnally JC: Pyschometric Theory. 2nd Edition ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.
• [34]Ajzen I: The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991, 50:179-211.
• [35]Francis JJ, Eccles MP, Johnston M: Constructing questionnaires based on the Theory of Planned Behavior - A manual for health services researchers. Newcastle upon. Tyne, England: Centre for Health Services Research Newcastle University; 2004.
• [36]Atkins S, Lewin S, Ringsberg KC: Provider experiences of the implementation of a new tuberculosis treatment programme: A qualitative study using the normalisation process model. BMC Health Serv Res 2011, 11(1):275. BioMed Central Full Text
• [37]Blakeman T, Protheroe J, Chew-Graham C: Understanding the management of early-stage chronic kidney disease in primary care: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 2012., 62(597) e233-e42
• [38]Elwyn G, Légaré F, Weijden T: Arduous implementation: does the normalisation process model explain why it’s so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice. Implement Sci 2008, 3(1):57. BioMed Central Full Text
• [39]Forster DA, Newton M, McLachlan HL: Exploring implementation and sustainability of models of care: can theory help? BMC Publ Health 2011, 11(5):S8. BioMed Central Full Text
• [40]Foy R, Ovretveit J, Shekelle PG: The role of theory in research to develop and evaluate the implementation of patient safety practices. BMJ Quality & Safety 2011, 20(5):453-59.
• [41]Franx G, Oud M, de Lange J: Implementing a stepped-care approach in primary care: results of a qualitative study. Implement Sci 2012, 7(1):8. BioMed Central Full Text
• [42]Gallacher K, May CR, Montori VM: Understanding Patients’ experiences of treatment burden in chronic heart failure using normalization process theory. Ann Fam Med 2011, 9(3):235-43.
• [43]Gask L, Bower P, Lovell K, Gask L, Bower P, Lovell K: What work has to be done to implement collaborative care for depression?Process evaluation of a trial utilizing the Normalization Process Model. Implement Sci 2010., 5(15) BioMed Central Full Text
• [44]Gask L, Rogers A, Campbell S: Beyond the limits of clinical governance? The case of mental health in English primary care. BMC Health Serv Res 2008, 8(1):63. BioMed Central Full Text
• [45]Gunn JM, Palmer VJ, Dowrick CF: Embedding effective depression care: using theory for primary care organisational and systems change. Implement Sci 2010, 5(1):62. BioMed Central Full Text
• [46]James DM: The applicability of normalisation process theory to speech and language therapy: a review of qualitative research on a speech and language intervention. Implement Sci 2011, 6(1):95. BioMed Central Full Text
• [47]Kennedy A, Chew-Graham C, Blakeman T: Delivering the WISE (Whole Systems Informing Self-Management Engagement) training package in primary care: learning from formative evaluation. Implement Sci 2010, 5(1):7. BioMed Central Full Text
• [48]MacFarlane A, O’Reilly-de Brun M: Using a theory-driven conceptual framework in qualitative health research. Qualitative Health Research (QUAL.HEALTH RES.) 2011, 22(5):607-18. 1998. May; 8.(3): 341.51.(32.ref)
• [49]Mair FS, Hiscock J, Beaton SC: Understanding factors that inhibit or promote the utilization of telecare in chronic lung disease. Chronic Illn 2008, 4(2):110-17.
• [50]Murray E, Burns J, May C: Why is it difficult to implement e-health initiatives? A qualitative study. Implement Sci 2011, 6(1):6. BioMed Central Full Text
• [51]Rogers A, Vassilev I, Sanders C: Social networks, work and network-based resources for the management of long-term conditions: a framework and study protocol for developing self-care support. Implement Sci 2011, 6(1):56. BioMed Central Full Text
• [52]Sanders T, Foster NE, Ong B: Perceptions of general practitioners towards the use of a new system for treating back pain: a qualitative interview study. BMC Med 2011, 9(1):49. BioMed Central Full Text
• [53]Sooklal R, Papadopoulos T, Ojiako U: Information systems development: a normalisation process theory perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems 2011, 111(8):1270-86.
• [54]Wilkes S, Rubin G: Process evaluation of infertility management in primary care: has open access HSG been normalized? Primary Health Care Research & Development 2009, 10:290-298.