...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >Facilitators and “deal breakers”: a mixed methods study investigating implementation of the Goal setting and action planning (G-AP) framework in community rehabilitation teams
【24h】

Facilitators and “deal breakers”: a mixed methods study investigating implementation of the Goal setting and action planning (G-AP) framework in community rehabilitation teams

机译:促进者和“交易破碎机”:一个混合方法研究了社区康复团队中的目标设定和行动规划(G-AP)框架的实施

获取原文

摘要

High quality goal setting in stroke rehabilitation is vital, but challenging to deliver. The G-AP framework (including staff training and a stroke survivor held G-AP record) guides patient centred goal setting with stroke survivors in community rehabilitation teams. We found G-AP was acceptable, feasible to deliver and clinically useful in one team. The aim of this study was to conduct a mixed methods investigation of G-AP implementation in diverse community teams prior to a large-scale evaluation. We approached Scottish community rehabilitation teams to take part. Following training, G-AP was delivered to stroke survivors within participating teams for 6?months. We investigated staff experiences of G-AP training and its implementation using focus groups and a training questionnaire. We investigated fidelity of G-AP delivery through case note review. Focus group data were analysed using a Framework approach; identified themes were mapped into Normalisation Process Theory constructs. Questionnaire and case note data were analysed descriptively. We recruited three teams comprising 55 rehabilitation staff. Almost all staff (93%, 51/55) participated in G-AP training; of those, 80% (n?=?41/51) completed the training questionnaire. Training was rated as ‘good’ or ‘very good’ by almost all staff (92%, n?=?37/41). G-AP was broadly implemented as intended in two teams. Implementation facilitators included - G-AP ‘made sense’; repetitive use of G-AP in practice; flexible G-AP delivery and positive staff appraisals of G-AP impact. G-AP failed to gain traction in the third team. Implementation barriers included - delays between G-AP training and implementation; limited leadership engagement; a poor ‘fit’ between G-AP and the team organisational structure and simultaneous delivery of other goal setting methods. Staff recommended (i) development of training to include implementation planning; (ii) ongoing local implementation review and tailoring, and (iii) development of electronic and aphasia friendly G-AP records. The interaction between G-AP and the practice setting is critical to implementation success or failure. Whilst facilitators support implementation success, barriers can collectively act as implementation “deal breakers”. Local G-AP implementation efforts should be planned, monitored and tailored. These insights can inform implementation of other complex interventions in community rehabilitation settings.
机译:中风康复的高质量目标设置是至关重要的,但挑战送达。 G-AP框架(包括员工培训和中风幸存者持有G-AP记录)指导患者以社区康复团队中的中风幸存者为中心的目标设置。我们发现G-AP是可接受的,可行的,在一个团队中提供和临床上有用。本研究的目的是在大规模评估之前进行多种社区团队中G-AP实施的混合方法。我们接近苏格兰社区康复团队参加。在培训之后,将G-AP交付给参与团队中的幸存者6?几个月。我们调查了G-AP培训的员工经验及其实施使用焦点小组和培训问卷。我们通过案例审查调查了G-AP交付的保真度。使用框架方法分析焦点组数据;确定的主题被映射到归一化过程理论构建体中​​。问卷和案例说明数据描述地分析了。我们招募了三支组合55名康复工作人员的团队。几乎所有员工(93%,51/55)参加了G-AP培训;其中80%(n?= 41/51)完成了培训问卷。几乎所有员工的培训被评为“好”或“非常好”(92%,N?= 37/41)。 G-AP广泛实施,主要实施在两支球队中。包括实施协调人员 - G-AP'是有道理的;在实践中重复使用G-AP;灵活的G-AP交付和G-AP影响的积极员工评估。 G-AP未能在第三队中获得牵引力。包括实施障碍 - G-AP培训与实施之间的延迟;有限的领导终止; G-AP与团队组织结构之间的“适合”差,同时交付其他目标设定方法。工作人员推荐(i)开发培训,包括实施规划; (ii)正在进行的地方执行审查和裁缝,(iii)开发电子和失语友好的G-AP记录。 G-AP与实践设置之间的交互对于实现成功或失败至关重要。虽然协调人支持执行成功,但障碍可以集体充当实施“交易破碎机”。应计划,监控和量身定制的本地G-AP实施努力。这些见解可以通过社区康复环境中的其他复杂干预措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号