Understanding Determinants of Sustainability Through a Realist Investigation of a Large‐Scale Quality Improvement Initiative (Lean): A Refined Program Theory
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Implementation science research seeks to understand ways to best ensure uptake of research-based initiatives to health care; however, there is little research done on how to sustain such efforts. Sustainability is the degree to which an initiative continues to be used in practice after efforts of implementation have ended. Sustainability research is a growing field of implementation science that needs further research to understand how to predict and measure the long-term use of effective initiatives to improve health care. The question of what influences the sustainability of research-based initiatives to improve health care remains unknown. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article was to present a refined program theory on the contextual factors and mechanisms that influence the sustainability of one large-scale quality management initiative (Lean) in pediatric health care. DESIGN: We conducted a multiphase realist investigation to explain under what contexts, for whom, how, and why Lean efforts are sustained or not sustained in pediatric health care through the generation of an explanatory program theory. METHODS: This article presents the theoretical triangulation of our multiphase realist investigation, resulting in a refined program theory. We integrated the initial program theories (IPTs) from each research phase to form a refined program theory. It involved going back and forth from the initial IPT to the findings from each phase and our middle-range theories and examining the most substantiated IPTs on the contextual factors and mechanisms that influenced the sustainability of Lean efforts. FINDINGS: The refined program theory depicts the complex nature to sustaining Lean efforts and that sustainability as a small, often unrepresentative portion of something much larger or more complex that cannot yet be seen or understood. The approach and nature of implementation is critical to shaping contexts for sustainability. Outcomes from implementation become facilitating or hindering contexts for sustainability. Customization to context is an important contextual factor for sustainability. Sense making, value congruency, and staff engagement are critical aspects from early implementation that enable or hinder processes of sustainment. Such mechanisms can trigger staff empowerment that can lead to a greater likelihood of sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have important implications for sustainability research, in understanding the determinants of sustainability of research-based initiatives in health care. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It is important to understand and explain determinants of sustainability through theory-driven evaluative research in order to assist key stakeholders in sustaining the effective research-based initiatives made to improve healthcare services, patient care, and outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,027 | 0,044 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,015 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».