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

      Factors that support readiness to implement integrated evidence-based practice to increase cancer screening

      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

          In 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP), which partners with health care systems and primary care clinics to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. We interviewed CRCCP stakeholders to explore the factors that support readiness for integrated implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities to promote CRC screening with other screening and chronic disease management activities in primary care clinics.

          Methods

          Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted a literature review and identified constructs to guide data collection and analysis. We purposively selected four CRCCP awardees that demonstrated ongoing engagement with clinic partner sites, willingness to collaborate with CDC and other stakeholders, and availability of high-quality data. We gathered background information on the selected program sites and conducted primary data collection interviews with program site staff and partners. We used NVivo QSR 11.0 to systematically pilot-code interview data, achieving a kappa coefficient of 0.8 or higher, then implemented a step-wise process to identify site-specific and cross-cutting emergent themes. We also included screening outcome data in our analysis to examine the impact of integrated cancer screening efforts on screening uptake.

          Results

          We identified four overarching factors that contribute to clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities: the funding environment, clinic governance structure, information sharing within clinics, and clinic leadership support. Sites reported supporting clinic partners’ readiness for integrated implementation by providing coordinated funding application processes and braided funding streams and by funding partner organizations to provide technical assistance to support efficient incorporation of EBIs and supporting activities into existing clinic workflows. These actions, in turn, support clinic readiness to integrate the implementation of EBIs and supporting activities that promote CRC screening along with other screening and chronic disease management activities.

          Discussion

          The selected CRCCP program sites supported clinics’ readiness to integrate CRC EBIs and supporting activities with other screening and chronic disease management activities increasing uptake of CRC screening and improving coordination of patient care.

          Conclusions

          We identified the factors that support clinic readiness to implement integrated EBIs and supporting activities including flexible funding mechanisms, effective data sharing systems, coordination across clinical staff, and supportive leadership. The findings provide insights into how public health programs and their clinic partners can collectively support integrated implementation to promote efficient, coordinated patient-centered care.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-022-00347-6.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

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

          Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation.

          The first purpose of this review was to assess the impact of implementation on program outcomes, and the second purpose was to identify factors affecting the implementation process. Results from over quantitative 500 studies offered strong empirical support to the conclusion that the level of implementation affects the outcomes obtained in promotion and prevention programs. Findings from 81 additional reports indicate there are at least 23 contextual factors that influence implementation. The implementation process is affected by variables related to communities, providers and innovations, and aspects of the prevention delivery system (i.e., organizational functioning) and the prevention support system (i.e., training and technical assistance). The collection of implementation data is an essential feature of program evaluations, and more information is needed on which and how various factors influence implementation in different community settings.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A theory of organizational readiness for change

            Background Change management experts have emphasized the importance of establishing organizational readiness for change and recommended various strategies for creating it. Although the advice seems reasonable, the scientific basis for it is limited. Unlike individual readiness for change, organizational readiness for change has not been subject to extensive theoretical development or empirical study. In this article, I conceptually define organizational readiness for change and develop a theory of its determinants and outcomes. I focus on the organizational level of analysis because many promising approaches to improving healthcare delivery entail collective behavior change in the form of systems redesign--that is, multiple, simultaneous changes in staffing, work flow, decision making, communication, and reward systems. Discussion Organizational readiness for change is a multi-level, multi-faceted construct. As an organization-level construct, readiness for change refers to organizational members' shared resolve to implement a change (change commitment) and shared belief in their collective capability to do so (change efficacy). Organizational readiness for change varies as a function of how much organizational members value the change and how favorably they appraise three key determinants of implementation capability: task demands, resource availability, and situational factors. When organizational readiness for change is high, organizational members are more likely to initiate change, exert greater effort, exhibit greater persistence, and display more cooperative behavior. The result is more effective implementation. Summary The theory described in this article treats organizational readiness as a shared psychological state in which organizational members feel committed to implementing an organizational change and confident in their collective abilities to do so. This way of thinking about organizational readiness is best suited for examining organizational changes where collective behavior change is necessary in order to effectively implement the change and, in some instances, for the change to produce anticipated benefits. Testing the theory would require further measurement development and careful sampling decisions. The theory offers a means of reconciling the structural and psychological views of organizational readiness found in the literature. Further, the theory suggests the possibility that the strategies that change management experts recommend are equifinal. That is, there is no 'one best way' to increase organizational readiness for change.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Conceptualization and measurement of organizational readiness for change: a review of the literature in health services research and other fields.

              Health care practitioners and change experts contend that organizational readiness for change is a critical precursor to successful change implementation. This article assesses how organizational readiness for change has been defined and measured in health services research and other fields. Analysis of 106 peer-reviewed articles reveals conceptual ambiguities and disagreements in current thinking and writing about organizational readiness for change. Inspection of 43 instruments for measuring organizational readiness for change reveals limited evidence of reliability or validity for most publicly available measures. Several conceptual and methodological issues that need to be addressed to generate knowledge useful for practice are identified and discussed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                csoloe@rti.org
                Journal
                Implement Sci Commun
                Implement Sci Commun
                Implementation Science Communications
                BioMed Central (London )
                2662-2211
                6 October 2022
                6 October 2022
                2022
                : 3
                : 106
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.62562.35, ISNI 0000000100301493, RTI International, ; 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, Durham, NC 27709 USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.416781.d, ISNI 0000 0001 2186 5810, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ; Atlanta, GA USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2415-9721
                Article
                347
                10.1186/s43058-022-00347-6
                9535984
                36199117
                73609cb1-9557-4250-8050-fe6471cb546c
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 24 March 2022
                : 16 September 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000030, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                colorectal cancer screening,public health,partnership,evidence-based interventions

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content234

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors604