Search

Abstract Background There is growing evidence that spending time with or in nature can be beneficial for health and wellbeing. Emerging evidence suggests potential benefits for staff and service users in healthcare settings, yet little is known about how to put Nature-based approaches (NBAs) into practice within the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) setting. The CAMHS Goes Wild project in Southwest England aimed to explore the implementation of NBAs within CAMHS, examining staff attitudes and understanding to identify potential benefits and challenges through a mixed methods study. Methods The study involved three phases of data collection: an online survey with two waves, the first wave prior to the training, and the second four months post-training, and semi-structured interviews. Data collection was designed to fit around NatureWell training, attended by sixty-four CAMHS staff, which took place alongside the study. All participants were sampled from one NHS Trust and the study was open to both those who had attended the NatureWell training and those who had not. Data were synthesised to produce an understanding of staff attitudes towards NBAs and perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of this approach. Results Ninety-seven staff responded to the wave 1 survey and 57 responded to the wave 2 survey. Fourteen staff members were interviewed. Data synthesis generated three themes: Tension between the culture of CAMHS and NBAs (Theme 1) and the need for buy-in and governance support (Theme 2). Theme three described the potential benefits of NBAs for staff and service users in CAMHS and is presented in a separate paper. The first two themes are presented in this paper. Conclusions The implementation of NBAs in mental health service settings for CYP presents both significant challenges and opportunities. Our findings suggest multiple barriers to implementation, often in the form of organisational or cultural factors, such as the risk averse nature of the service. Our work also elucidates several potential facilitators which may address or mitigate some of these barriers. These potential enablers, such as harnessing the role of firsthand experience, warrant further exploration in the implementation of NBAs in CAMHS.

Abstract Background This study presents guidelines for implementation distilled from the findings of a realist evaluation. The setting was local health districts in New South Wales, Australia that implemented three clinical improvement initiatives as part of a state-wide program. We focussed on implementation strategies designed to develop health professionals’ capability to deliver value-based care initiatives for multisite programs. Capability, which increases implementers’ ability to cope with unexpected scenarios is key to managing change. Methods We used a mixed methods realist evaluation which tested and refined program theories elucidating the complex dynamic between context (C), mechanism (M) and outcome (O) to determine what works, for whom, under what circumstances. Data was drawn from program documents, a realist synthesis, informal discussions with implementation designers, and interviews with 10 key informants (out of 37 identified) from seven sites. Data analysis employed a retroductive approach to interrogate the causal factors identified as contributors to outcomes. Results CMO statements were refined for four initial program theories: Making it Relevant– where participation in activities was increased when targeted to the needs of the staff; Investment in Quality Improvement– where engagement in capability development was enhanced when it was valued by all levels of the organisation; Turnover and Capability Loss– where the effects of staff turnover were mitigated; and Community-Wide Priority– where there was a strategy of spanning sites. From these data five guiding principles for implementers were distilled: (1) Involve all levels of the health system to effectively implement large-scale capability development, (2) Design capability development activities in a way that supports a learning culture, (3) Plan capability development activities with staff turnover in mind, (4) Increased capability should be distributed across teams to avoid bottlenecks in workflows and the risk of losing key staff, (5) Foster cross-site collaboration to focus effort, reduce variation in practice and promote greater cohesion in patient care. Conclusions A key implementation strategy for interventions to standardise high quality practice is development of clinical capability. We illustrate how leadership support, attention to staff turnover patterns, and making activities relevant to current issues, can lead to an emergent learning culture.

Abstract Background Unwarranted clinical variation in hospital care includes the underuse, overuse, or misuse of services. Audit and feedback is a common strategy to reduce unwarranted variation, but its effectiveness varies widely across contexts. We aimed to identify implementation strategies, mechanisms, and contextual circumstances contributing to the impact of audit and feedback on unwarranted clinical variation. Methods Realist study examining a state-wide value-based healthcare program implemented between 2017 and 2021 in New South Wales, Australia. Three initiatives within the program included audit and feedback to reduce unwarranted variation in inpatient care for different conditions. Multiple data sources were used to formulate the initial audit and feedback program theory: a systematic review, realist review, program document review, and informal discussions with key program stakeholders. Semi-structured interviews were then conducted with 56 participants to refute, refine, or confirm the initial program theories. Data were analysed retroductively using a context-mechanism-outcome framework for 11 transcripts which were coded into the audit and feedback program theory. The program theory was validated with three expert panels: senior health leaders (n = 19), Agency for Clinical Innovation (n = 11), and Ministry of Health (n = 21) staff. Results The program’s audit and feedback implementation strategy operated through eight mechanistic processes. The strategy worked well when clinicians (1) felt ownership and buy-in, (2) could make sense of the information provided, (3) were motivated by social influence, and (4) accepted responsibility and accountability for proposed changes. The success of the strategy was constrained when the audit process led to (5) rationalising current practice instead of creating a learning opportunity, (6) perceptions of unfairness and concerns about data integrity, 7) development of improvement plans that were not followed, and (8) perceived intrusions on professional autonomy. Conclusions Audit and feedback strategies may help reduce unwarranted clinical variation in care where there is engagement between auditors and local clinicians, meaningful audit indicators, clear improvement plans, and respect for clinical expertise. We contribute theoretical development for audit and feedback by proposing a Model for Audit and Feedback Implementation at Scale. Recommendations include limiting the number of audit indicators, involving clinical staff and local leaders in feedback, and providing opportunities for reflection.

Objective Large-scale, multisite hospital improvement initiatives can advance high-quality care for patients. Implementation support is key to adoption of change in this context. Strategies that foster collaboration within local teams, across sites and between initiative developers and users are important. However not all implementation strategies are successful in all settings, sometimes realising poor or unintended outcomes. Our objective here is to develop guiding principles for effective collaborative implementation strategies for multi-site hospital initiatives.Design Mixed-method realist evaluation. Realist studies aim to examine the underlying theories that explain differing outcomes, identifying mechanisms and contextual factors that may trigger them.Setting We report on collaborative strategies used in four multi-site initiatives conducted in all public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia (n>100).Participants Using an iterative process, information was gathered on collaborative implementation strategies used, then initial programme theories hypothesised to underlie the strategies’ outcomes were surfaced using a realist dialogic approach. A realist interview schedule was developed to elicit evidence for the posited initial programme theories. Fourteen participants from 20 key informants invited participated. Interviews were conducted via Zoom, transcribed and analysed. From these data, guiding principles of fostering collaboration were developed.Results Six guiding principles were distilled: (1) structure opportunities for collaboration across sites; (2) facilitate meetings to foster learning and problem-solving across sites; (3) broker useful long-term relationships; (4) enable support agencies to assist implementers by giving legitimacy to their efforts in the eyes of senior management; (5) consider investment in collaboration as effective well beyond the current projects; (6) promote a shared vision and build momentum for change by ensuring inclusive networks where everyone has a voice.Conclusion Structuring and supporting collaboration in large-scale initiatives is a powerful implementation strategy if contexts described in the guiding principles are present.

Abstract Implementation science in healthcare aims to understand how to get evidence into practice. Once this is achieved in one setting, it becomes increasingly difficult to replicate elsewhere. The problem is often attributed to differences in context that influence how and whether implementation strategies work. We argue that realist research paradigms provide a useful framework to express the effect of contextual factors within implementation strategy causal processes. Realist studies are theory-driven evaluations that focus on understanding how and why interventions work under different circumstances. They consider the interaction between contextual circumstances, theoretical mechanisms of change and the outcomes they produce, to arrive at explanations of conditional causality (i.e., what tends to work, for whom, under what circumstances). This Commentary provides example applications using preliminary findings from a large realist implementation study of system-wide value-based healthcare initiatives in New South Wales, Australia. If applied judiciously, realist implementation studies may represent a sound approach to help optimise delivery of the right care in the right setting and at the right time.

Realist evaluation is a method increasingly adopted to provide an understanding of how and why a program works, for whom, and under what circumstances. Initial program theories (IPT) are the crucial starting point of any realist evaluation, however descriptions about how they are developed in practice remain under-reported in the published literature. This article argues for the value of genuine research-group conversations using David Bohm’s concept of dialogue in realist research. We label it the realist dialogic approach. We draw out the relational qualities as well as the contextual circumstances of dialogue through our development of IPT and interview guides for a research study on the implementation and scaling of a large-system value-based program to transform complex health services. We selected the relevant middle-range theories, conducted a literature review, and drew on informal discussions with key stakeholders, to develop IPT through research-group conversations. The benefits of this approach were: 1) development of rigorous, novel, deep and well-tailored IPT, 2) detailed understanding of the complex intervention under investigation and development of rapport and networks with participants, 3) empirically grounded Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations, predicated on suitable abstract and contextually-contingent middle-range theories, and 4) productive research team interactions which supported the entire research process. The challenges of this approach include: 1) establishing and retaining a sense of humility across the research team, 2) contextual circumstances can hinder dialogic relationship, and 3) time and resource heavy. This paper uses middle-range theory and ethnographic insights to advance the existing practice of realist evaluations and offer transferable lessons to other scholars considering similar approaches. Moreover, we content that the use of middle-range theory to extend the methodological literature is a novel contribution to realist work.

Design Realist synthesis.Study background Large-scale hospital improvement initiatives can standardise healthcare across multiple sites but results are contingent on the implementation strategies that complement them. The benefits of these implemented interventions are rarely able to be replicated in different contexts. Realist studies explore this phenomenon in depth by identifying underlying context–mechanism–outcome interactions.Objectives To review implementation strategies used in large-scale hospital initiatives and hypothesise initial programme theories for how they worked across different contexts.Methods An iterative, four-step process was applied. Step 1 explored the concepts inherent in large-scale interventions using database searches and snowballing. Step 2 identified strategies used in their implementation. Step 3 identified potential initial programme theories that may explain strategies’ mechanisms. Step 4 focused on one strategy-theory pairing to develop and test context–mechanism–outcome hypotheses. Data was drawn from searches (March–May 2020) of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and CINAHL, snowballed from key papers, implementation support websites and the expertise of the research team and experts. Inclusion criteria: reported implementation of a large-scale, multisite hospital intervention. RAMESES reporting standards were followed.Results Concepts were identified from 51 of 381 articles. Large-scale hospital interventions were characterised by a top–down approach, external and internal support and use of evidence-based interventions. We found 302 reports of 28 different implementation strategies from 31 reviews (from a total of 585). Formal theories proposed for the implementation strategies included Diffusion of Innovation, and Organisational Readiness Theory. Twenty-three context–mechanism–outcome statements for implementation strategies associated with planning and assessment activities were proposed. Evidence from the published literature supported the hypothesised programme theories and were consistent with Organisational Readiness Theory’s tenets.Conclusion This paper adds to the literature exploring why large-scale hospital interventions are not always successfully implemented and suggests 24 causative mechanisms and contextual factors that may drive outcomes in the planning and assessment stage.

Indigenous communities, linguists, teachers, and language activists have been developing methods to revitalise endangered languages over several decades. Not only are these methods diverse, they are usually implemented in various ways according to local needs and aspirations. Language revitalisation methods focus on proficiency, but there is also interest in strengthening identity, resilience, and wellbeing. Aside from a handful of successes, programs may not be achieving desired outcomes. One could try to evaluate specific programs. However, we believe that a necessary first step is to examine published literature of revitalisation efforts to develop initial understandings of how they work. In particular, we seek to understand how revitalisation efforts tap into the speech community, how local participation affects outcomes, and how this involvement is supported and sustained by external programs, with a focus on language revitalisation efforts in Australia. We conduct a realist synthesis, and through analysis of 125 pieces of literature, we identify 13 initial theories. In analysing these theories, we identify two major gaps in our understanding of language revitalisation: how revitalisation programs work to strengthen communities and promote commitment. We propose these as significant, under-theorised elements of successful revitalisation which can guide exploration at the level of individual programs.