Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37848826›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023

Planning and implementing practice changes in Ontario maternal-newborn hospital units: a secondary qualitative analysis.

Jessica Reszel, Olivia Daub, Sandra I Dunn, Christine E Cassidy, Kaamel Hafizi, Marnie Lightfoot, Dahlia Pervez, Ashley Quosdorf, Allison Wood, Ian D Graham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jessica ReszelSchool of Nursing, University of Ottawa, 200 Lees Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada. jreszel@ohri.ca.
Olivia DaubSchool of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western University, 1201 Western Road, London, ON, N6G 1H1, Canada.
Sandra I DunnSchool of Nursing, University of Ottawa, 200 Lees Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada.
Christine E CassidySchool of Nursing, Dalhousie University, 5869 University Avenue, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada.
Kaamel HafiziBetter Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) Ontario, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L1, Canada.
Marnie LightfootWomen and Children's Health Network, Orillia Soldiers' Memorial Hospital, 170 Colborne St W, Orillia, ON, L3V 2Z3, Canada.
Dahlia PervezParent Research Advisor, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Ashley QuosdorfNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, The Ottawa Hospital, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L6, Canada.
Allison WoodBetter Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) Ontario, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L1, Canada.
Ian D GrahamSchool of Nursing, University of Ottawa, 200 Lees Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 133576CIHR 143237CIHR Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMoving evidence into practice is complex, and pregnant and birthing people and their infants do not always receive care that aligns with the best available evidence. Implementation science can inform how to effectively move evidence into practice. While there are a growing number of examples of implementation science being studied in maternal-newborn care settings, it remains unknown how real-world teams of healthcare providers and leaders approach the overall implementation process when making practice changes. The purpose of this study was to describe maternal-newborn hospital teams' approaches to implementing practice changes. We aimed to identify what implementation steps teams take (or not) and identify strengths and potential areas for improvement based on best practices in implementation science.

methodsWe conducted a supplementary qualitative secondary analysis of 22 interviews completed in 2014-2015 with maternal-newborn nursing leaders in Ontario, Canada. We used directed content analysis to code the data to seven steps in an implementation framework (Implementation Roadmap): identify the problem and potential best practice; assemble local evidence; select and customize best practice; discover barriers and drivers; tailor implementation strategies; field-test, plan evaluation, prepare to launch; launch, evaluate, and sustain. Frequency counts are presented for each step.

resultsParticipants reported completing a median of 4.5 of 7 Implementation Roadmap steps (range = 3-7), with the most common being identifying a practice problem. Other steps were described less frequently (e.g., selecting and adapting evidence, field-testing, outcome evaluation) or discussed frequently but not optimally (e.g., barriers assessment). Participants provided examples of how they engaged point-of-care staff throughout the implementation process, but provided fewer examples of engaging pregnant and birthing people and their families. Some participants stated they used a formal framework or process to guide their implementation process, with the most common being quality improvement approaches and tools.

conclusionsWe identified variability across the 22 hospitals in the implementation steps taken. While we observed many strengths, we also identified areas where further support may be needed. Future work is needed to create opportunities and resources to support maternal-newborn healthcare providers and leaders to apply principles and tools from implementation science to their practice change initiatives.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelMaternal Health ServicesFemaleHospital UnitsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornOntarioPregnancyQuality ImprovementImplementation practiceImplementation scienceMaternal-newborn carePractice changesQualitative secondary analysis

Identifiers

PMID37848826
PMCPMC10583424

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.