20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      ‘Participation is integral’: understanding the levers and barriers to the implementation of community participation in primary healthcare: a qualitative study using normalisation process theory

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Many international health policies recognise the World Health Organization’s (2008) vision that communities should be involved in shaping primary healthcare services. However, researchers continue to debate definitions, models, and operational challenges to community participation. Furthermore, there has been no use of implementation theory to study how community participation is introduced and embedded in primary healthcare in order to generate insights and transferrable lessons for making this so. Using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) as a conceptual framework, this qualitative study was designed to explore the levers and barriers to the implementation of community participation in primary healthcare as a routine way of working.

          Methods

          We conducted two qualitative studies based on a national Initiative designed to support community participation in primary care in Ireland. We had a combined multi-stakeholder purposeful sample ( n = 72), utilising documentary evidence (study 1), semi-structured interviews (studies 1 and 2) and focus groups (study 2). Data generation and analysis were informed by Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) Research Methodology and NPT.

          Results

          For many stakeholders, community participation in primary healthcare was a new way of working. Stakeholders did not always have a clear, shared understanding of the aims, objectives and benefits of this way of working and getting involved in a specific project sometimes provided this clarity. Drivers/champions, and strong working partnerships, were considered integral to its initiation and implementation. Participants emphasised the benefits of funding, organisational support, training and networking to enact relevant activities. Health-promoting activities and healthcare consultation/information events were generally successful, but community representation on interdisciplinary Primary Care Teams proved more challenging. Overall, participants were broadly positive about the impacts of community participation, but were concerned about the scope to sustain the work without the ‘protected’ space and resources that the national Initiative afforded.

          Conclusions

          Despite the success of specific activities undertaken as part of a community process in Irish primary healthcare, the likelihood of this becoming a routine way of working in Ireland is low. Analysing the learning from this process using NPT provides theoretically informed recommendations that are transferrable to other settings and can be used to prospectively design and formatively evaluate community participation processes.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4331-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Member Checking

          The trustworthiness of results is the bedrock of high quality qualitative research. Member checking, also known as participant or respondent validation, is a technique for exploring the credibility of results. Data or results are returned to participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences. Member checking is often mentioned as one in a list of validation techniques. This simplistic reporting might not acknowledge the value of using the method, nor its juxtaposition with the interpretative stance of qualitative research. In this commentary, we critique how member checking has been used in published research, before describing and evaluating an innovative in-depth member checking technique, Synthesized Member Checking. The method was used in a study with patients diagnosed with melanoma. Synthesized Member Checking addresses the co-constructed nature of knowledge by providing participants with the opportunity to engage with, and add to, interview and interpreted data, several months after their semi-structured interview.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Using Normalization Process Theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review

              Background Normalization Process Theory (NPT) identifies, characterises and explains key mechanisms that promote and inhibit the implementation, embedding and integration of new health techniques, technologies and other complex interventions. A large body of literature that employs NPT to inform feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions has now emerged. The aims of this review were to review this literature; to identify and characterise the uses and limits of NPT in research on the implementation and integration of healthcare interventions; and to explore NPT’s contribution to understanding the dynamics of these processes. Methods A qualitative systematic review was conducted. We searched Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar for articles with empirical data in peer-reviewed journals that cited either key papers presenting and developing NPT, or the NPT Online Toolkit (www.normalizationprocess.org). We included in the review only articles that used NPT as the primary approach to collection, analysis or reporting of data in studies of the implementation of healthcare techniques, technologies or other interventions. A structured data extraction instrument was used, and data were analysed qualitatively. Results Searches revealed 3322 citations. We show that after eliminating 2337 duplicates and broken or junk URLs, 985 were screened as titles and abstracts. Of these, 101 were excluded because they did not fit the inclusion criteria for the review. This left 884 articles for full-text screening. Of these, 754 did not fit the inclusion criteria for the review. This left 130 papers presenting results from 108 identifiable studies to be included in the review. NPT appears to provide researchers and practitioners with a conceptual vocabulary for rigorous studies of implementation processes. It identifies, characterises and explains empirically identifiable mechanisms that motivate and shape implementation processes. Taken together, these mean that analyses using NPT can effectively assist in the explanation of the success or failure of specific implementation projects. Ten percent of papers included critiques of some aspect of NPT, with those that did mainly focusing on its terminology. However, two studies critiqued NPT emphasis on agency, and one study critiqued NPT for its normative focus. Conclusions This review demonstrates that researchers found NPT useful and applied it across a wide range of interventions. It has been effectively used to aid intervention development and implementation planning as well as evaluating and understanding implementation processes themselves. In particular, NPT appears to have offered a valuable set of conceptual tools to aid understanding of implementation as a dynamic process. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0758-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                rachel.mcevoy@hse.ie
                edel.tierney@ul.ie
                anne.macfarlane@ul.ie
                Journal
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Services Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6963
                23 July 2019
                23 July 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 515
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9692, GRID grid.10049.3c, Graduate Entry Medical School, , University of Limerick, ; Limerick, Ireland
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9692, GRID grid.10049.3c, Graduate Entry Medical School, , University of Limerick, ; Limerick, Ireland
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9692, GRID grid.10049.3c, Professor of Primary Healthcare Research, Graduate Entry Medical School, And Health Research Institute, , University of Limerick, ; Limerick, Ireland
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1365-9205
                Article
                4331
                10.1186/s12913-019-4331-7
                6651937
                31337391
                1dc11597-be8f-48a0-afac-955b3ef8bbdf
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 15 March 2018
                : 8 July 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010414, Health Research Board;
                Award ID: HRA HSR-2010-2
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Health Service Executive
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Health & Social care
                community participation,primary healthcare,normalization process theory,implementation theory,health policy

                Comments

                Comment on this article