Evaluation Methods for Hospital Projects

Buelow, Janet R.; Zuckweiler, Kathryn M.; Rosacker, Kirsten M.

doi:10.1080/00185860903534182

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In hospitals, changes are increasingly implemented into practice through projects (Buelow et al 2010). In this article we are interested in how structured hospital projects facilitate sensegiving and how projects are seen as a means for change management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambiguous meanings of projects as facilitators of sensegiving

Lunkka

Suhonen

2014

J Nurs Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambiguous meanings of projects as facilitators of sensegiving

Lunkka

Suhonen

2014

J Nurs Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was identified at the first meeting that management support was important for any project to be successful (Buelow et al , 2010) and therefore the second meeting, 4 months later, was held for the original group plus the critical care managers, matrons, consultants and any other interested members of the multi‐disciplinary team. The lead consultant intensivist from hospital 4, who has many years of critical care follow‐up experience, gave a presentation of his experiences from the follow‐up clinic and the sequelae of critical illness, and he also raised the profile of early intervention rehabilitation, and this provoked a lively question‐and‐answer session.…”

Section: Bringing the Network Togethermentioning

confidence: 99%

NICE CG83 – rehabilitation after critical illness: implementation across a network

Cotton

2012

Nursing in Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, not all projects achieve their goals [6] and the results are not always permanent. The success of the work done in projects is influenced to a significant degree by project management and planning, and by the commitment and participation of staff and leadership [7][8][9]. The work done in projects and project management has been studied extensively since the early 2000s from the perspectives of engineering science [2] as well as economics and CrossMark ← Click for updates doi: 10.7243/2056-9157-3-1 information technology [10,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The work done in healthcare projects

Pohjola¹,

Suhonen²,

Mattila³

et al. 2016

J Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of the study was to analyze healthcare projects from the viewpoint of the planning, implementation and evaluation of the projects. The purpose was to generate knowledge about the work done in projects that can be utilized in healthcare management. Methods:The study was a non-experimental survey. Descriptive statistics were collected using a convenience sampling method. The data were collected from all hospital-funded development projects in all acute care setting in one Finnish university hospital (€1.1M spent on funding for the projects in 2008-2010; 58 projects). 397 project participants were recruited for participation in the web survey which formed the basis for the research data. The e-questionnaire was comprised of five domains: Time and staff resources used for the project (7 questions); Project planning and providing information about the project (8 questions); Experiences of project implementation (16 questions); Evaluation (7 questions); Human resources affecting the project outcomes (26 questions). The questionnaire included background information as well as open-ended questions enquiring about the participants' views on the development of project related activities. After two survey rounds the response rate was 29.5% (n=117). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. Results: 71% of the project participants took part in the project in addition to their usual responsibilities. The participants were mainly physicians and nurses (77%). Half of the participants were in managerial positions and had previous project experience. 50% of the participants thought that the information communicated about the project was sufficient. The project groups were multi-professional; cooperation was seen as having been successful and that aims were perceived as having been achieved successfully(92.5%). Although the participants noticed a conflict between their own work and the project work, their eagerness for future-oriented development and smooth integration of project results as part of their daily routines were the main reasons they took part in the projects. Conclusions: Setting up clear guidelines and adhering to them would encourage experts to take part in projects. Dissemination of information during the project internally and externally would strengthen the degree of commitment of the project participants. Integration of projects into the hospital strategy would be of primary importance to guarantee the success of long-term systematic development work.

show abstract

Evaluation Methods for Hospital Projects

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Ambiguous meanings of projects as facilitators of sensegiving

Ambiguous meanings of projects as facilitators of sensegiving

NICE CG83 – rehabilitation after critical illness: implementation across a network

The work done in healthcare projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About