利用实施研究综合框架,评估针对康复机构中脑外伤患者的执行功能日间治疗计划的实施情况。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-23 DOI:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000998
Maria Kajankova, Theodore Tsaousides, Emily Dudek, Teresa Ashman
{"title":"利用实施研究综合框架,评估针对康复机构中脑外伤患者的执行功能日间治疗计划的实施情况。","authors":"Maria Kajankova, Theodore Tsaousides, Emily Dudek, Teresa Ashman","doi":"10.1097/HTR.0000000000000998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention (Short-Term Executive Plus [STEP]) into routine clinical practice using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) by comparing high (HI) and low implementation (LI) sites.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Qualitative interviews conducted with professionals who work with people who have sustained brain injuries at various rehabilitations sites across the United States.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Seven sites completed training, consultation, and agreed to implement STEP.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective qualitative study.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Qualitative interview developed for the purposes of this study and the CFIR for evaluation of implementation efforts and identification of barriers and facilitators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 7 sites, 6 completed interviews. Out of the 39 CFIR constructs, 4 distinguished between HI and LI sites. Four distinguishing factors included evidence strength and quality, needs and resources of those served by the organization, leadership engagement, and engaging champions. Five common factors were identified (4 positive and 1 negative) across HI and LI sites, which may reflect aspects of implementation that could inform future implementation efforts. Ten inconclusive factors were identified, having both a positive and a negative influence on implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While there were several factors that were viewed positively by all sites, only 4 factors made a difference in implementation outcomes. These distinguishing factors can help inform future implementation efforts, highlighting a need for strong evidence supporting an intervention, a match between the intervention and the needs of the population served, engaging those in leadership and decision-making roles and ensuring their buy-in, and having a strong champion directly involved in implementation. In addition, taking a closer look at common and inconclusive factors may enable us to identify areas in which the implementation efforts could be strengthened.</p>","PeriodicalId":15901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"446-457"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the Implementation of a Day-Treatment Program for Executive Functioning for Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury in Rehabilitation Settings Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.\",\"authors\":\"Maria Kajankova, Theodore Tsaousides, Emily Dudek, Teresa Ashman\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HTR.0000000000000998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention (Short-Term Executive Plus [STEP]) into routine clinical practice using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) by comparing high (HI) and low implementation (LI) sites.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Qualitative interviews conducted with professionals who work with people who have sustained brain injuries at various rehabilitations sites across the United States.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Seven sites completed training, consultation, and agreed to implement STEP.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective qualitative study.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Qualitative interview developed for the purposes of this study and the CFIR for evaluation of implementation efforts and identification of barriers and facilitators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 7 sites, 6 completed interviews. Out of the 39 CFIR constructs, 4 distinguished between HI and LI sites. Four distinguishing factors included evidence strength and quality, needs and resources of those served by the organization, leadership engagement, and engaging champions. Five common factors were identified (4 positive and 1 negative) across HI and LI sites, which may reflect aspects of implementation that could inform future implementation efforts. Ten inconclusive factors were identified, having both a positive and a negative influence on implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While there were several factors that were viewed positively by all sites, only 4 factors made a difference in implementation outcomes. These distinguishing factors can help inform future implementation efforts, highlighting a need for strong evidence supporting an intervention, a match between the intervention and the needs of the population served, engaging those in leadership and decision-making roles and ensuring their buy-in, and having a strong champion directly involved in implementation. In addition, taking a closer look at common and inconclusive factors may enable us to identify areas in which the implementation efforts could be strengthened.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"446-457\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000998\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000998","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的通过比较实施率高(HI)和实施率低(LI)的康复机构,利用实施研究综合框架(CFIR)确定将认知康复干预措施(短期执行力强化训练[STEP])纳入常规临床实践的障碍和促进因素:背景:对美国各地康复机构中从事脑损伤患者工作的专业人员进行定性访谈:设计:回顾性定性研究:设计:回顾性定性研究:主要衡量标准:为本研究和 CFIR 制定的定性访谈,以评估实施工作并确定障碍和促进因素:在 7 个地点中,有 6 个完成了访谈。在 39 个 CFIR 结构中,有 4 个区分了高风险地区和低风险地区。四个区分因素包括证据的力度和质量、组织服务对象的需求和资源、领导参与以及倡导者的参与。在高收入国家和低收入国家中发现了 5 个共同因素(4 个积极因素和 1 个消极因素),这些因素可能反映了实施工作的方方面面,可以为今后的实施工作提供参考。此外,还发现了 10 个不确定因素,它们对实施工作既有积极影响,也有消极影响:结论:虽然有几个因素被所有地点积极看待,但只有 4 个因素对实施结果产生了影响。这些不同的因素有助于为今后的实施工作提供参考,突出表明需要有强有力的证据支持干预措施、干预措施与服务人群的需求相匹配、让领导和决策人员参与并确保他们的支持,以及有一个强有力的支持者直接参与实施工作。此外,仔细研究共同的和不确定的因素,可以使我们确定在哪些方面可以加强实施工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of the Implementation of a Day-Treatment Program for Executive Functioning for Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury in Rehabilitation Settings Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Objective: To identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention (Short-Term Executive Plus [STEP]) into routine clinical practice using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) by comparing high (HI) and low implementation (LI) sites.

Setting: Qualitative interviews conducted with professionals who work with people who have sustained brain injuries at various rehabilitations sites across the United States.

Participants: Seven sites completed training, consultation, and agreed to implement STEP.

Design: Retrospective qualitative study.

Main measures: Qualitative interview developed for the purposes of this study and the CFIR for evaluation of implementation efforts and identification of barriers and facilitators.

Results: Out of 7 sites, 6 completed interviews. Out of the 39 CFIR constructs, 4 distinguished between HI and LI sites. Four distinguishing factors included evidence strength and quality, needs and resources of those served by the organization, leadership engagement, and engaging champions. Five common factors were identified (4 positive and 1 negative) across HI and LI sites, which may reflect aspects of implementation that could inform future implementation efforts. Ten inconclusive factors were identified, having both a positive and a negative influence on implementation.

Conclusions: While there were several factors that were viewed positively by all sites, only 4 factors made a difference in implementation outcomes. These distinguishing factors can help inform future implementation efforts, highlighting a need for strong evidence supporting an intervention, a match between the intervention and the needs of the population served, engaging those in leadership and decision-making roles and ensuring their buy-in, and having a strong champion directly involved in implementation. In addition, taking a closer look at common and inconclusive factors may enable us to identify areas in which the implementation efforts could be strengthened.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
153
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation is a leading, peer-reviewed resource that provides up-to-date information on the clinical management and rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injuries. Six issues each year aspire to the vision of “knowledge informing care” and include a wide range of articles, topical issues, commentaries and special features. It is the official journal of the Brain Injury Association of America (BIAA).
期刊最新文献
Reciprocal Causation Among Pain, Physical Health, and Mental Health 1 Year Post-Traumatic Brain Injury: A Cross-Lagged Panel Model From the TRACK-TBI Study. Association of Frailty, Comorbidities and Muscularity With GOS and 30-Day Mortality After TBI in Elderly Patients-A Retrospective Study in 1104 Patients. Relationships Between Neighborhood Disadvantage, Race/Ethnicity, and Neurobehavioral Symptoms Among Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. Cross-Lagged Associations Among Sleep, Headache, and Pain in Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: An A-CAP Study. Evaluating the Implementation of an Occupational Therapy-Led Concussion Clinic Model Into Usual Practice: A Mixed Methods Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1