MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors Influencing Best‐Practice Guideline Implementation: Lessons Learned from Administrators, Nursing Staff, and Project Leaders

2007· article· en· W1970969615 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineThematic analysisNursingImplementation researchContext (archaeology)Best practicePsychologyOrganizational cultureTeamworkMedicineQualitative researchMedical educationPublic relationsPsychological interventionPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines are promising tools for closing the research evidence-practice gap, yet effective and timely implementation of guidelines into practice remains fragmented and inconsistent. Factors influencing effective guideline implementation remain poorly understood, particularly in nursing. A sound understanding of barriers and facilitators is critical for development of effective and targeted guideline implementation strategies. AIM: This paper reports the perceptions of administrators, staff, and project leaders about factors influencing implementation of nursing best practice guidelines. METHODS: Twenty-two organizations, in clusters of two to five, implemented one of seven guidelines in acute, community and long-term care settings. The topics were client centered care, crisis intervention, healthy adolescent development, pain assessment, pressure ulcers, supporting and strengthening families and therapeutic relationships. Fifty-nine administrators, 58 staff and 8 project leaders participated in post implementation semi-structured telephone interviews. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted. FINDINGS: Factors at individual, organizational and environmental levels were identified as influencing guideline implementation. Facilitators included learning about the guideline through group interaction, positive staff attitudes and beliefs, leadership support, champions, teamwork and collaboration, professional association support, and inter-organizational collaboration and networks. Barriers included negative staff attitudes and beliefs, limited integration of guideline recommendations into organizational structures and processes, time and resource constraints, and organizational and system level change. Similarities and differences in perceptions of these factors were found among staff, project leaders and administrators. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: Best practice guideline implementation strategies should address barriers related to the individual practitioner, social context, and organizational and environmental context, and should be tailored to different groups of stakeholders (i.e., nursing staff, project leaders and administrators). Health care administrators need to recognize the "real" costs and complexity associated with successful implementation of guidelines and the need to ensure corporate commitment at the onset.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.516
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.064 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it