TY - JOUR
T1 - Barriers and enablers to the implementation of a complex quality improvement intervention for acute kidney injury
T2 - A qualitative evaluation of stakeholder perceptions of the Tackling AKI study
AU - Lamming, Laura
AU - McDonach, Eileen
AU - Mohammed, Mohammed A.
AU - Stoves, John
AU - Lewington, Andy J.
AU - Roberts, Russell
AU - Samarasinghe, Yohan
AU - Shah, Nikunj
AU - Fluck, Richard J.
AU - Jackson, Natalie
AU - Johnson, Melanie
AU - Jones, Carol
AU - Selby, Nicholas M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding for this evaluation and project came from the Scaling Up Improvement call from The Health Foundation (www.health.org.uk. NS received the award (https://www.health.org.uk/ programmes/scaling-improvement/projects/ tackling-acute-kidney-injury-multi-centre-quality). Grant code: 1502-Derby-Selby-SUI. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Lamming et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - Background Acute kidney injury in hospital patients is common and associated with reduced survival and higher healthcare costs. The Tackling Acute Kidney Injury (TAKI) quality improvement project aimed to reduce mortality rates in patients with acute kidney injury by implementing a multicomponent intervention comprising of an electronic alert, care bundle and education in five UK hospitals across a variety of wards. A parallel developmental evaluation using a case study approach was conducted to provide the implementation teams with insights into factors that might impact intervention implementation and fidelity. The qualitative element of the evaluation will be reported. Methods 29 semi-structured interviews with implementation teams across the five hospitals were carried out to identify perceived barriers and enablers to implementation. Interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim and Framework analysis was conducted. Results Interviews generated four ‘barriers and enablers’ to implementation themes: i) practical/contextual factors, ii) skills and make-up of the TAKI implementation team, iii) design, development and implementation approach, iv) staff knowledge, attitudes, behaviours and support. Enablers included availability of specialist teams (e.g. educational teams), multidisciplinary implementation teams with strong leadership, team-based package completion and proactive staff. Barriers were frequently the converse of facilitators. Conclusions Despite diversity of sites, a range of common local factors–contextual, intervention-based and individual–were identified as potential barriers and enablers to fidelity, including intervention structure/design and process of/approach to implementation. Future efforts should focus on early identification and management of barriers and tailored optimisation of known enablers such as leadership and multidisciplinary teams to encourage buy-in. Improved measures of real-time intervention and implementation fidelity would further assist local teams to target their support during such quality improvement initiatives.
AB - Background Acute kidney injury in hospital patients is common and associated with reduced survival and higher healthcare costs. The Tackling Acute Kidney Injury (TAKI) quality improvement project aimed to reduce mortality rates in patients with acute kidney injury by implementing a multicomponent intervention comprising of an electronic alert, care bundle and education in five UK hospitals across a variety of wards. A parallel developmental evaluation using a case study approach was conducted to provide the implementation teams with insights into factors that might impact intervention implementation and fidelity. The qualitative element of the evaluation will be reported. Methods 29 semi-structured interviews with implementation teams across the five hospitals were carried out to identify perceived barriers and enablers to implementation. Interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim and Framework analysis was conducted. Results Interviews generated four ‘barriers and enablers’ to implementation themes: i) practical/contextual factors, ii) skills and make-up of the TAKI implementation team, iii) design, development and implementation approach, iv) staff knowledge, attitudes, behaviours and support. Enablers included availability of specialist teams (e.g. educational teams), multidisciplinary implementation teams with strong leadership, team-based package completion and proactive staff. Barriers were frequently the converse of facilitators. Conclusions Despite diversity of sites, a range of common local factors–contextual, intervention-based and individual–were identified as potential barriers and enablers to fidelity, including intervention structure/design and process of/approach to implementation. Future efforts should focus on early identification and management of barriers and tailored optimisation of known enablers such as leadership and multidisciplinary teams to encourage buy-in. Improved measures of real-time intervention and implementation fidelity would further assist local teams to target their support during such quality improvement initiatives.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072535855&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0222444
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0222444
M3 - Article
C2 - 31539376
AN - SCOPUS:85072535855
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 14
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 9
M1 - e0222444
ER -