Cited by 400Health Policy Implementation ScienceHealthcare Quality and ManagementGlobal Health and Surgery

A framework for scaling up health interventions: lessons from large-scale improvement initiatives in Africa

Open access
Barker, Pierre M., Reid, Amy, Schall, Marie W.·2015·Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Scaling up complex health interventions to large populations is not a straightforward task. Without intentional, guided efforts to scale up, it can take many years for a new evidence-based intervention to be broadly implemented. For the past decade, researchers and implementers have developed models of scale-up that move beyond earlier paradigms that assumed ideas and practices would successfully spread through a combination of publication, policy, training, and example. Drawing from the previously reported frameworks for scaling up health interventions and our experience in the USA and abroad, we describe a framework for taking health interventions to full scale, and we use two large-scale improvement initiatives in Africa to illustrate the framework in action. We first identified other scale-up approaches for comparison and analysis of common constructs by searching for systematic reviews of scale-up in health care, reviewing those bibliographies, speaking with experts, and reviewing common research databases (PubMed, Google Scholar) for papers in English from peer-reviewed and "gray" sources that discussed models, frameworks, or theories for scale-up from 2000 to 2014. We then analyzed the results of this external review in the context of the models and frameworks developed over the past 20 years by Associates in Process Improvement (API) and the Institute for Healthcare improvement (IHI). Finally, we reflected on two national-scale improvement initiatives that IHI had undertaken in Ghana and South Africa that were testing grounds for early iterations of the framework presented in this paper. RESULTS: The framework describes three core components: a sequence of activities that are required to get a program of work to full scale, the mechanisms that are required to facilitate the adoption of interventions, and the underlying factors and support systems required for successful scale-up. The four steps in the sequence include (1) Set-up, which prepares the ground for introduction and testing of the intervention that will be taken to full scale; (2) Develop the Scalable Unit, which is an early testing phase; (3) Test of Scale-up, which then tests the intervention in a variety of settings that are likely to represent different contexts that will be encountered at full scale; and (4) Go to Full Scale, which unfolds rapidly to enable a larger number of sites or divisions to adopt and/or replicate the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Our framework echoes, amplifies, and systematizes the three dominant themes that occur to varying extents in a number of existing scale-up frameworks. We call out the crucial importance of defining a scalable unit of organization. If a scalable unit can be defined, and successful results achieved by implementing an intervention in this unit without major addition of resources, it is more likely that the intervention can be fully and rapidly scaled. When tying this framework to quality improvement (QI) methods, we describe a range of methodological options that can be applied to each of the four steps in the framework's sequence.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13012-016-0374-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [15]Implementing Best Practices Consortium A guide for fostering change to scale up effective health services 2007 Cambridge Management Sciences for Health
  2. [26]Institute for Healthcare Improvement The breakthrough series: IHI’s collaborative model for achieving breakthrough improvement (IHI innovation series white paper) 2003 Cambridge Institute for Healthcare Improvement
  3. [34]Moen R A guide to idealized design 2002 Cambridge Institute for Healthcare Improvement
  4. [36]Reinertsen JL Bisognano M Pugh MD Seven leadership leverage points for organization-level improvement in health care (second edition) (IHI innovation series white paper) 2008 Cambridge Institute for Healthcare Improvement
  5. [37]Swenson S Pugh M McMullan C Kabcenell A Book high impact leadership: improve care, improve the health of populations, and reduce costs (IHI white paper) 2013 Cambridge Institute for Healthcare Improvement
  6. [38]McCannon CJ Schall MW Perla RJ Planning for scale: a guide for designing large-scale improvement initiatives (IHI innovation series white paper) 2008 Cambridge Institute for Healthcare Improvement
  7. [41]Mate K Sifrim Z Provost L Sustainability of improvement interventions (IHI 90-day R&D project final summary report) 2011 Cambridge Institute for Healthcare Improvement

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barker, P. M., Reid, A., & Schall, M. W.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Institute for Healthcare Improvement (US)
Corresponding author
Barker, Pierre M.
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2015-12
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
12-12
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2272927507
Cited by
400
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 4
FWCI
31.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (acceptedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • AcademyHealth
  • Kaiser Permanente
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Health and Surgery
Keywords
complex health interventions, intervention adoption, Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Ghana, South Africa, Africa, health system improvement, intervention replication, evidence-based practice dissemination, health professions education
MeSH terms
Africa, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Organizational Objectives, Models, Organizational, Evidence-Based Medicine, Capacity Building

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review