Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Methodology

Translational framework for implementation evaluation and research: a normalisation process theory coding manual for qualitative research and instrument development

Authors: Carl R. May, Bianca Albers, Mike Bracher, Tracy L. Finch, Anthony Gilbert, Melissa Girling, Kathryn Greenwood, Anne MacFarlane, Frances S. Mair, Christine M. May, Elizabeth Murray, Sebastian Potthoff, Tim Rapley

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) is frequently used to inform qualitative research that aims to explain and evaluate processes that shape late-stage translation of innovations in the organisation and delivery of healthcare. A coding manual for qualitative researchers using NPT will facilitate transparent data analysis processes and will also reduce the cognitive and practical burden on researchers.

Objectives

(a) To simplify the theory for the user. (b) To describe the purposes, methods of development, and potential application of a coding manual that translates normalisation process theory (NPT) into an easily usable framework for qualitative analysis. (c) To present an NPT coding manual that is ready for use.

Method

Qualitative content analysis of papers and chapters that developed normalisation process theory, selection and structuring of theory constructs, and testing constructs against interview data and published empirical studies using NPT.

Results

A coding manual for NPT was developed. It consists of 12 primary NPT constructs and conforms to the Context-Mechanism-Outcome configuration of realist evaluation studies. Contexts are defined as settings in which implementation work is done, in which strategic intentions, adaptive execution, negotiating capability, and reframing organisational logics are enacted. Mechanisms are defined as the work that people do when they participate in implementation processes and include coherence-building, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring. Outcomes are defined as effects that make visible how things change as implementation processes proceed and include intervention mobilisation, normative restructuring, relational restructuring, and sustainment.

Conclusion

The coding manual is ready to use and performs three important tasks. It consolidates several iterations of theory development, makes the application of NPT simpler for the user, and links NPT constructs to realist evaluation methods. The coding manual forms the core of a translational framework for implementation research and evaluation.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Strauss A. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987.CrossRef
2.
Schreier M. Qualitative content analysis in practice. London: SAGE; 2012.
3.
Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–88.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Patton MQ. Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: a personal, experiential perspective. Qual Soc Work. 2002;1(3):261–83.CrossRef
5.
McLellan-Lemal K, MacQueen E. Team-based codebook development: structure, process, and agreement. In: Guest G, editor. Handbook for team-based qualitative research. Altamira: Lanham MD; 2008. p. 119–36.
6.
Adams GS, Converse BA, Hales AH, Klotz LE. People systematically overlook subtractive changes. Nature. 2021;592(7853):258–61.PubMedCrossRef
7.
May C. A rational model for assessing and evaluating complex interventions in health care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6(86):1–11.
8.
May C, Finch T. Implementing, embedding, and integrating practices: an outline of normalization process theory. Sociology. 2009;43(3):535–54.CrossRef
9.
10.
11.
May C, Rapley T, Finch T. Normalization Process Theory. In: Nilsen P, Birken S, editors. International Handbook of Implementation Science. London: Edward Elgar; 2020. p. 144–67.CrossRef
12.
McEvoy R, Ballini L, Maltoni S, O’Donnell CA, Mair FS, MacFarlane A. A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes. Implement Sci. 2014;9:2.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
13.
May C, Cummings A, Girling M, Bracher M, Mair FS, et al. Using normalization process theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Huddlestone L, Turner J, Eborall H, Hudson N, Davies M, Martin G. Application of normalisation process theory in understanding implementation processes in primary care settings in the UK: a systematic review. BMC Fam Pract. 2020;21(1):1–16.CrossRef
15.
Mohr JW, Wagner-Pacifici R, Breiger RL. Towards a computational hermeneutics. Big Data Soc. 2015;2(2):2053951715613809.CrossRef
16.
May C, Finch T, Mair F, Ballini L, Dowrick C. Understanding the implementation of complex interventions in health care: the normalization process model. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:148.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
May C, Mair FS, Finch T, MacFarlane A, Dowrick C, et al. Development of a theory of implementation and integration: normalization process Theory. Implement Sci. 2009;4:29.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Murray E, May C, Mair F. Development and formative evaluation of the e-Health Implementation Toolkit (e-HIT). BMC Med Inform Decis. 2010;10(1):61.CrossRef
19.
May C, Finch T, Ballini L, MacFarlane A, Mair F, Murray E, et al. 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.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
Finch TL, Rapley T, Girling M, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol. Implement Sci. 2013;8:43.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Rapley T, Girling M, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, McColl E, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 1 - development of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):133.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Finch TL, Girling M, May C, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):135.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Mair FS, May C, O'Donnell C, Finch T, Sullivan F, Murray E. Factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of e-health systems: an explanatory systematic review. Bull World Health Organ. 2012;90(5):357–64.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
May C, Sibley A, Hunt K. The nursing work of hospital-based clinical practice guideline implementation: an explanatory systematic review using normalisation process theory. Int J Nurs Stud. 2014;51(2):289–99.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Johnson MJ, May CR. Promoting professional behaviour change in healthcare: what interventions work, and why? A theory-led overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2015;5(9):e008592.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
Greenwood K, Webb R, Gu J, Fowler D, de Visser R, Bremner S, et al. The Early Youth Engagement in first episode psychosis (EYE-2) study: pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a team-based motivational engagement intervention to improve engagement. Trials. 2021;22(1):272.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
27.
Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T. Theorising interventions as events in systems. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;43(3-4):267–76.PubMedCrossRef
28.
May C, Myall M, Lund S, Campling N, Bogle S, Dace S, et al. Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do? Soc Sci Med. 2020;258:113143.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Ong BN, Morden A, Brooks L, Porcheret M, Edwards JJ, Sanders T, et al. Changing policy and practice: making sense of national guidelines for osteoarthritis. Soc Sci Med. 2014;106:101–9.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Pope C, Halford S, Turnbull J, Prichard J, Calestani M, May C. Using computer decision support systems in NHS emergency and urgent care: ethnographic study using normalisation process theory. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):111.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Agreli H, Barry F, Burton A, Creedon S, Drennan J, et al. Ethnographic study using normalization process theory to understand the implementation process of infection prevention and control guidelines in Ireland. BMJ Open. 2019;9(8):e029514.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Sutton E, Herbert G, Burden S, Lewis S, Thomas S, Ness A, et al. Using the normalization process theory to qualitatively explore sense-making in implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme: “it’s not rocket science”. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):e0195890.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
33.
Dickinson C, Gibson G, Gotts Z, Stobbart L, Robinson L. Cognitive stimulation therapy in dementia care: exploring the views and experiences of service providers on the barriers and facilitators to implementation in practice using normalization process theory. Int Psychogeriatr. 2017;29(11):1869–78.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Jones CH, Glogowska M, Locock L, Lasserson DS. Embedding new technologies in practice–a normalization process theory study of point of care testing. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):591.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
Trietsch J, van Steenkiste B, Hobma S, Frericks A, Grol R, Metsemakers J, et al. The challenge of transferring an implementation strategy from academia to the field: a process evaluation of local quality improvement collaboratives in Dutch primary care using the normalization process theory. J Eval Clin Pract. 2014;20(6):1162–71.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Hall A, Wilson CB, Stanmore E, Todd C. Implementing monitoring technologies in care homes for people with dementia: a qualitative exploration using normalization process theory. Int J Nurs Stud. 2017;72:60–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Overbeck G, Davidsen AS, Kousgaard MB. Enablers and barriers to implementing collaborative care for anxiety and depression: a systematic qualitative review. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):165.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
Foster M, Burridge L, Donald M, Zhang J, Jackson C. The work of local healthcare innovation: a qualitative study of GP-led integrated diabetes care in primary health care. Organization, structure and delivery of healthcare. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):11.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Røsstad T, Garåsen H, Steinsbekk A, Håland E, Kristoffersen L, Grimsmo A. Implementing a care pathway for elderly patients, a comparative qualitative process evaluation in primary care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):86.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
41.
Keenan J, Poland F, Manthorpe J, Hart C, Moniz-Cook E. Implementing e-learning and e-tools for care home staff supporting residents with dementia and challenging behaviour: a process evaluation of the ResCare study using normalisation process theory. Dementia. 2020;19(5):1604–20.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Alharbi TS, Carlström E, Ekman I, Olsson L-E. Implementation of person-centred care: management perspective. J Hosp Admin. 2014;3(3):p107.CrossRef
43.
Morden A, Brooks L, Jinks C, Porcheret M, Ong BN, Dziedzic K. Research “push”, long term-change, and general practice. J Health Organ Manag. 2015;29(7):798–821.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Lloyd A, Joseph-Williams N, Edwards A, Rix A, Elwyn G. Patchy 'coherence': using normalization process theory to evaluate a multi-faceted shared decision-making implementation program (MAGIC). Implement Sci. 2013;8:102.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Valaitis R, Cleghorn L, Dolovich L, Agarwal G, Gaber J, Mangin D, et al. Examining interprofessional team structures and processes in the implementation of a primary care intervention (Health TAPESTRY) for older adults using normalization process theory. BMC Fam Pract. 2020;21(1):63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Burau V, Carstensen K, Fredens M, Kousgaard MB. Exploring drivers and challenges in implementation of health promotion in community mental health services: a qualitative multi-site case study using normalization process theory. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
Asiedu GB, Fang JL, Harris AM, Colby CE, Carroll K. Health Care Professionals’ perspectives on teleneonatology through the lens of normalization process theory. Health Sci Rep. 2019;2(2):e111.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Shulver W, Killington M, Crotty M. ‘Massive potential’ or ‘safety risk’? Health worker views on telehealth in the care of older people and implications for successful normalization. BMC Med Inform Dec Mak. 2016;16(1):131.CrossRef
49.
Hooker L, Small R, Humphreys C, Hegarty K, Taft A. Applying normalization process theory to understand implementation of a family violence screening and care model in maternal and child health nursing practice: a mixed method process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):39.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Ziegler E, Valaitis R, Yost J, Carter N, Risdon C. “Primary care is primary care”: use of normalization process theory to explore the implementation of primary care services for transgender individuals in Ontario. PLoS One. 2019;14(4):e0215873.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Holtrop JS, Potworowski G, Fitzpatrick L, Kowalk A, Green LA. Effect of care management program structure on implementation: a normalization process theory analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):386.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
Scott J, Finch T, Bevan M, Maniatopoulos G, Gibbins C, Yates B. Acute kidney injury electronic alerts: mixed methods normalisation process theory evaluation of their implementation into secondary care in England. BMJ Open. 2019;9(12):e032925.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Bamford C, Poole M, Brittain K, Chew-Graham C, Fox C, Iliffe S, et al. team C: Understanding the challenges to implementing case management for people with dementia in primary care in England: a qualitative study using normalization process theory. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(1):1–2.CrossRef
54.
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications; 1997.
55.
May C. Agency and implementation: understanding the embedding of healthcare innovations in practice. Soc Sci Med. 2013;78(0):26–33.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Avent-Holt D, Tomaskovic-Devey D. Organizations as the building blocks of social inequalities. Sociol Compass. 2019;13(2):e12655.
57.
Morgeson FP, Mitchell TR, Liu D. Event system theory: an event-oriented approach to the organizational sciences. Acad Manag Rev. 2015;40(4):515–37.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Translational framework for implementation evaluation and research: a normalisation process theory coding manual for qualitative research and instrument development
Authors
Carl R. May
Bianca Albers
Mike Bracher
Tracy L. Finch
Anthony Gilbert
Melissa Girling
Kathryn Greenwood
Anne MacFarlane
Frances S. Mair
Christine M. May
Elizabeth Murray
Sebastian Potthoff
Tim Rapley
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01191-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Implementation Science 1/2022 Go to the issue

Research

Leading the charge in the education sector: development and validation of the School Implementation Leadership Scale (SILS)

Debate

Six practical recommendations for improved implementation outcomes reporting

Systematic review

Barriers and enablers for deprescribing benzodiazepine receptor agonists in older adults: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies using the theoretical domains framework

Systematic review

Conceptual and relational advances of the PARIHS and i-PARIHS frameworks over the last decade: a critical interpretive synthesis

Research

Results of a multi-site pragmatic hybrid type 3 cluster randomized trial comparing level of facilitation while implementing an intervention in community-dwelling disabled and older adults in a Medicaid waiver

Study protocol

Can clinician champions reduce potentially inappropriate medications in people living with dementia? Study protocol for a cluster randomized trial