Cited by 42Health Policy Implementation ScienceClinical practice guidelines implementationPrimary Care and Health Outcomes

What drives adoption of a computerised, multifaceted quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary healthcare settings? A mixed methods analysis using normalisation process theory

Open access
Patel, Bindu, Usherwood, Tim, Harris, Mark, Patel, Anushka, Panaretto, Kathryn, Zwar, Nicholas, Peiris, David·2018·Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A computerised, multifaceted quality improvement (QI) intervention for cardiovascular disease (CVD) management in Australian primary healthcare was evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled trial. The intervention was associated with improved CVD risk factor screening but there was no improvement in prescribing rates of guideline-recommended medicines. The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation to identify and explain the underlying mechanisms by which the intervention did and did not have an impact. METHODS/DESIGN: Normalisation process theory (NPT) was used to understand factors that supported or constrained normalisation of the intervention into routine practice. A case study design was used in which six of the 30 participating intervention sites were purposively sampled to obtain a mix of size, governance, structure and performance. Multiple data sources were drawn on including trial outcome data, surveys of job satisfaction and team climate (68 staff) and in-depth interviews (19 staff). Data were primarily analysed within cases and compared with quantitative findings in other trial intervention and usual care sites. RESULTS: We found a complex interaction between implementation processes and several contextual factors affecting uptake of the intervention. There was no clear association between team climate, job satisfaction and intervention outcomes. There were four spheres of influence that appeared to enhance or detract from normalisation of the intervention: organisational mission and history (e.g. strategic investment to promote a QI culture enhanced cognitive participation), leadership (e.g. ability to energise or demotivate others influenced coherence), team environment (e.g. synergistic activities of team members with different skill sets influenced collective action) and technical integrity of the intervention (e.g. tools that slowed computer systems limited reflective action). DISCUSSION: Use of NPT helped explain how certain contextual factors influence the work that is done by individuals and teams when implementing a novel intervention. Although these factors do not necessarily distil into a recipe for successful uptake, they may assist system planners, intervention developers, and health professionals to better understand the trajectory that primary health care services may take when developing and engaging with QI interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN 12611000478910 . Registered 08 May 2011.

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/s13012-018-0830-x

Cites

61 of 61 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?

  • No significant associations were found between team climate and fidelity to a multifaceted cardiovascular disease management intervention.

    “In contrast, no significant associations were found between team climate and fidelity to a multifaceted cardiovascular disease management intervention, with qualitative data suggesting variation in the influence of teamwork across practices [77].”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Patel, B., Usherwood, T., Harris, M., Patel, A., Panaretto, K., Zwar, N., & Peiris, D.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • University of Wollongong (AU)
Corresponding author
Patel, Bindu
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2018-11-12
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
140-140
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2900921803
Cited by
42
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council (1010547, 1075308)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Keywords
cardiovascular care, quality improvement intervention, primary care, Normalisation Process Theory, implementation process evaluation, intervention uptake, organizational leadership, team climate, job satisfaction, implementation barriers and facilitators
MeSH terms
Implementation Science, Attitude of Health Personnel, Australia, Cardiovascular Diseases, Environment, Group Processes, Humans, Job Satisfaction, Leadership, Patient Care Team, Primary Health Care, User-Computer Interface, Organizational Culture, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Disease Management, Guideline Adherence, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Quality Improvement

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