Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Quality improvement strategies for organizational change: a multiphase observational study to increase insight into nonparticipating organizations

Authors: Jeanny J. A. de Groot, Maite Timmermans, José M. C. Maessen, Bjorn Winkens, Carmen D. Dirksen, Brigitte F. M. Slangen, Trudy van der Weijden

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The scope of implementation research is often restricted to the analysis of organizations that participate voluntarily in implementation interventions. The recruitment of participants for a quality improvement collaborative increases awareness of the specific innovation. The objective of this multiphase observational study was to identify differences between organizations that participated in a large-scale implementation project aiming to improve perioperative care, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay after gynecologic surgery and organizations that did not participate. A secondary objective was to explore how perioperative practice changed among nonparticipants.

Methods

Of the seven gynecology departments of nonparticipating Dutch hospitals, five agreed to participate in a retrospective analysis. Baseline data of participating hospitals’ (N = 19) characteristics, time to functional recovery, and length of hospital stay were compared. Outcome measures for the subsequent pre-post awareness study in the five nonparticipating hospitals were: (1) overall adherence to predefined evidence-based perioperative elements; and (2) change in functional recovery and length of hospital stay. Multivariable regression models, adjusted for baseline characteristics, were used for analysis.

Results

In retrospect, nonparticipating and participating hospitals did not differ in baseline characteristics, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay. In three of the five nonparticipating hospitals, adherence to the selected evidence-based perioperative elements increased significantly after awareness of the trial (overall mean difference 9.7%, 95% CI 6.9 to 12.5%, p <  0.001). Linear regression models revealed no statistically significant or clinically relevant differences in time to functional recovery (mean difference − 0.2 days, 95% CI -0.7 to 0.2, p = 0.319) or length of hospital stay (mean difference − 0.4 days, 95% CI -1.3 to 0.5, p = 0.419) in the nonparticipating hospitals. None of these hospitals managed to reduce time to functional recovery or length of hospital stay significantly.

Conclusions

No differences in perioperative outcomes between the nonparticipating and participating hospitals were identified at baseline. Despite the statistically significant improvement in overall evidence-based perioperative care, the awareness raised by recruitment activities alone was not enough to reduce time to functional recovery and length of hospital stay in nonparticipating hospitals. Insight into the trends of nonparticipants is valuable to existing implementation effectiveness research.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7:50.CrossRef Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7:50.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(6):iii–v 1-72.CrossRef Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(6):iii–v 1-72.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Gagliardi AR, Alhabib S, members of Guidelines International Network Implementation Working Group. Trends in guideline implementation: a scoping systematic review. Implement Sci. 2015;10:54. Gagliardi AR, Alhabib S, members of Guidelines International Network Implementation Working Group. Trends in guideline implementation: a scoping systematic review. Implement Sci. 2015;10:54.
4.
go back to reference Stetler CB, Mittman BS, Francis J. Overview of the VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) and QUERI theme articles: QUERI series. Implement Sci. 2008;3:8.CrossRef Stetler CB, Mittman BS, Francis J. Overview of the VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) and QUERI theme articles: QUERI series. Implement Sci. 2008;3:8.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group. Data collection checklist. Ontario: Institute of Population Health. University of Ottawa; 2011. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group. Data collection checklist. Ontario: Institute of Population Health. University of Ottawa; 2011.
6.
go back to reference 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):1491–4.CrossRef 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):1491–4.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Gagliardi AR. "More bang for the buck": exploring optimal approaches for guideline implementation through interviews with international developers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:404. Gagliardi AR. "More bang for the buck": exploring optimal approaches for guideline implementation through interviews with international developers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:404.
8.
go back to reference Solberg LI. If you've seen one quality improvement collaborative. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(3):198–9.CrossRef Solberg LI. If you've seen one quality improvement collaborative. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(3):198–9.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust. 2004;180(Suppl 6):S57–60.PubMed Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust. 2004;180(Suppl 6):S57–60.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Grol R. Implementing guidelines in general practice care. Qual Health Care. 1992;1(3):184–91.CrossRef Grol R. Implementing guidelines in general practice care. Qual Health Care. 1992;1(3):184–91.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Weiner BJ, Amick H, Lee SY. Conceptualization and measurement of organizational readiness for change: a review of the literature in health services research and other fields. Med Care Res Rev. 2008;65(4):379–436.CrossRef Weiner BJ, Amick H, Lee SY. Conceptualization and measurement of organizational readiness for change: a review of the literature in health services research and other fields. Med Care Res Rev. 2008;65(4):379–436.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Kringos DS, Sunol R, Wagner C, Mannion R, Michel P, Klazinga NS, et al. The influence of context on the effectiveness of hospital quality improvement strategies: a review of systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:277.CrossRef Kringos DS, Sunol R, Wagner C, Mannion R, Michel P, Klazinga NS, et al. The influence of context on the effectiveness of hospital quality improvement strategies: a review of systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:277.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ovretveit J. Understanding the conditions for improvement: research to discover which context influences affect improvement success. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(Suppl 1):i18–23.CrossRef Ovretveit J. Understanding the conditions for improvement: research to discover which context influences affect improvement success. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(Suppl 1):i18–23.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kilo CM. A framework for collaborative improvement: lessons from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's breakthrough series. Qual Manag Health Care. 1998;6(4):1–13.CrossRef Kilo CM. A framework for collaborative improvement: lessons from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's breakthrough series. Qual Manag Health Care. 1998;6(4):1–13.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Wilson T, Berwick DM, Cleary PD. What do collaborative improvement projects do? Experience from seven countries. Jt Comm J Qual Saf. 2003;29(2):85–93.CrossRef Wilson T, Berwick DM, Cleary PD. What do collaborative improvement projects do? Experience from seven countries. Jt Comm J Qual Saf. 2003;29(2):85–93.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Rogers E. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003. Rogers E. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.
17.
go back to reference Maessen J, Dejong CH, Hausel J, Nygren J, Lassen K, Andersen J, et al. A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg. 2017;94(2):224–31.CrossRef Maessen J, Dejong CH, Hausel J, Nygren J, Lassen K, Andersen J, et al. A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg. 2017;94(2):224–31.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference de Groot JJ, Maessen JM, Slangen BF, Winkens B, Dirksen CD, van der Weijden T. A stepped strategy that aims at the nationwide implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme in major gynaecological surgery: study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2015;10:106.CrossRef de Groot JJ, Maessen JM, Slangen BF, Winkens B, Dirksen CD, van der Weijden T. A stepped strategy that aims at the nationwide implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme in major gynaecological surgery: study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2015;10:106.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Barber EL, Van Le L. Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecology and gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2015;70(12):780–92.CrossRef Barber EL, Van Le L. Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecology and gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2015;70(12):780–92.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference de Groot JJ, Ament SM, Maessen JM, Dejong CH, Kleijnen JM, Slangen BF. Enhanced recovery pathways in abdominal gynecologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(4):382–95.CrossRef de Groot JJ, Ament SM, Maessen JM, Dejong CH, Kleijnen JM, Slangen BF. Enhanced recovery pathways in abdominal gynecologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(4):382–95.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Nelson G, Kalogera E, Dowdy SC. Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(3):586–94.CrossRef Nelson G, Kalogera E, Dowdy SC. Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(3):586–94.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Ahmed J, Khan S, Gatt M, Kallam R, MacFie J. Compliance with enhanced recovery programmes in elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2010;97(5):754–8.CrossRef Ahmed J, Khan S, Gatt M, Kallam R, MacFie J. Compliance with enhanced recovery programmes in elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2010;97(5):754–8.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O, Soop M, Nygren J, et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146(5):571–7.CrossRef Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O, Soop M, Nygren J, et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146(5):571–7.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, et al. Guidelines for pre- and intra-operative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations - part I. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140(2):313–22.CrossRef Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, et al. Guidelines for pre- and intra-operative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations - part I. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140(2):313–22.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, et al. Guidelines for postoperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations - part II. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140(2):323–32.CrossRef Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Achtari C, et al. Guidelines for postoperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations - part II. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140(2):323–32.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth. 1997;78(5):606–17.CrossRef Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth. 1997;78(5):606–17.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Glasgow RE, Klesges LM, Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Vogt TM. Evaluating the impact of health promotion programs: using the RE-AIM framework to form summary measures for decision making involving complex issues. Health Educ Res. 2006;21(5):688–94.CrossRef Glasgow RE, Klesges LM, Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Vogt TM. Evaluating the impact of health promotion programs: using the RE-AIM framework to form summary measures for decision making involving complex issues. Health Educ Res. 2006;21(5):688–94.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Mays GP, Hogg RA, Castellanos-Cruz DM, Hoover AG, Fowler LC. Public health research implementation and translation: evidence from practice-based research networks. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(6):752–62.CrossRef Mays GP, Hogg RA, Castellanos-Cruz DM, Hoover AG, Fowler LC. Public health research implementation and translation: evidence from practice-based research networks. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(6):752–62.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Herbert G, Sutton E, Burden S, Lewis S, Thomas S, Ness A, et al. Healthcare professionals’ views of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme: a qualitative investigation. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):617.CrossRef Herbert G, Sutton E, Burden S, Lewis S, Thomas S, Ness A, et al. Healthcare professionals’ views of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme: a qualitative investigation. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):617.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Quality improvement strategies for organizational change: a multiphase observational study to increase insight into nonparticipating organizations
Authors
Jeanny J. A. de Groot
Maite Timmermans
José M. C. Maessen
Bjorn Winkens
Carmen D. Dirksen
Brigitte F. M. Slangen
Trudy van der Weijden
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3847-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Health Services Research 1/2018 Go to the issue