Implementation Outcomes and Indicators as a New Challenge in Health Services Research: A Systematic Scoping Review

Willmeroth, Tabea; Wesselborg, Bärbel; Kuske, Silke

doi:10.1177/0046958019861257

Cited by 22 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(189 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Notable efforts to identify robust implementation outcome instruments at scale include systematic reviews of quantitative instruments validated in mental health settings [13] and public health and community settings [14], and more recently, a systematic scoping review has identified implementation outcomes and indicator-based implementation measures [15]. The vast majority of implementation outcome instruments are developed to assess the implementation of a specific intervention; therefore, a review of implementation outcome instruments validated in physical healthcare settings will retrieve a different set of instruments to those validated in mental health or community settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Implementation research aims to facilitate the timely and routine implementation and sustainment of evidence-based interventions and services. A glaring gap in this endeavour is the capability of researchers, healthcare practitioners and managers to quantitatively evaluate implementation efforts using psychometrically sound instruments. To encourage and support the use of precise and accurate implementation outcome measures, this systematic review aimed to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings. Method: The following data sources were searched from inception to March 2019, with no language restrictions: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL and the Cochrane library. Studies that evaluated the measurement properties of implementation outcome instruments in physical healthcare settings were eligible for inclusion. Proctor et al.'s taxonomy of implementation outcomes was used to guide the inclusion of implementation outcomes: acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, adoption, penetration, implementation cost and sustainability. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Psychometric quality of the included instruments was assessed using the Contemporary Psychometrics checklist (ConPsy). Usability was determined by number of items per instrument.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, common statements/ recommendations of ADA together with EASD have been published (Inzucchi et al 2012;Rydén et al 2013). Unified quality standards are necessary for a systematic evaluation and reporting of diabetes management programs (Pajunen et al 2010a;Willmeroth et al 2019). Nevertheless, it is unclear if the needs of people with diabetes are finally met.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality criteria/key components for high quality of diabetes management to avoid diabetes-related complications

Rothe

Manuwald

Kügler

et al. 2020

J Public Health (Berl.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of this review shoud be to map data and to identify quality indicators for good practices for diabetes management and secondary prevention, specifically of type 2 diabetes. Methods To achieve this aim we performed the following steps: (i) a literature review on evaluation criteria, (ii) selection of quality criteria and key components for high quality of care, (iii) creation of a checklist to identify the best practice of diabetes management based on the detected criteria. Results The literature search about the quality indicators for diabetes care resulted in the following: identifying of key components and quality indicators for structure, process and outcome quality. Conclusions The set of quality criteria will be discussed and used to identify the best practice diabetes management programs for secondary prevention of type 2 diabetes.

show abstract

“…According to Proctor et al [32], acceptability should be assessed from participant and/or provider perspectives, considering either knowledge of or direct experience with various dimensions of the practice, or in this case, the measures, implemented. The literature supports both quantitative and qualitative methods of assessing healthcare implementation outcomes, including acceptability [28,34,35]. Further, acceptability can be assessed prospectively (before implementation), concurrently (during implementation), and retrospectively (after implementation) [35].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The assessment of employment support program success and individual employment readiness is often based on the use of participant skill assessments developed for use with neurotypical populations. While numerous measures have been developed and validated to evaluate employment readiness and life skills, many of these, including career-planning and employment readiness measures, have not yet been assessed for use with persons on the spectrum [28,29]. The Work Readiness Inventory (WRI) and Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment (ACLSA) are two valid and reliable measures of employment readiness and life skills which were developed for use in neurotypical populations [30,31].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The measure must also be acceptable such that users perceive it as "agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory," considering key elements such as content, complexity, and comfort [32,p.67]. Acceptability is a measure of the implementation outcome, which helps determine the quality of use of particular practices [28] as well as a precondition for attaining desired service delivery outcomes [32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acceptability of employment readiness measures in youth and young adults on the autism spectrum: a mixed-methods study

Wittevrongel

Mitchell

Hébert

et al. 2021

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Reliable, valid, and pragmatic measures are essential for monitoring and evaluating employment readiness and comparing the effectiveness of alternative implementation strategies. The Work Readiness Inventory (WRI) and Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment (ACLSA) are valid measures of employment readiness in neurotypical populations; however, their acceptability (i.e., user perception of measure as agreeable/satisfactory) for persons on the autism spectrum is not yet known. This investigation assesses the acceptability of the WRI and a modified ACLSA (ACLSA-M) in measuring employment readiness in youth/young adults on the spectrum. Methods: A concurrent triangulation mixed-methods study design utilizing quantitative pre-post measurement of a community-based employment readiness program alongside qualitative survey assessment was employed to determine concurrent acceptability. For robustness, further explication through peer debriefing of experts evaluated the retrospective acceptability via interview and acceptabilityrate assessment. Results: Findings indicated that both measures are acceptable, although individual-and job-specific item modifications are advised, particularly due to disability-specific needs. Significant change in employment readiness in youth/young adults on the spectrum supports concurrent acceptability. Peer debriefing provided rich data on retrospective acceptability. Acceptability-rates of 0.84 and 0.91 confirm broad acceptability of these measures. Conclusions: Implications are presented for clinicians and researchers, highlighting the relevance for autism-specific measurement development and acceptability. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONGiven the lower labor force participation of persons on the autism spectrum, a combination of measures should be used in the assessment of an individual's employment readiness. In youth and young adults on the spectrum, employment readiness can be measured using the Work Readiness Inventory (WRI) and a modified version of the Ansell-Casey Life Skills Assessment (ACLSA-M). In clinical practice and research, modifying the contents of these measures may be advised to minimize language complexity, and maximize ease in self report. When designing, developing, and testing new measures in rehabilitation practice or research, the intent should be broadened by involving diverse representation from the project outset, by engaging both those on the spectrum and neurotypical populations.

show abstract

Implementation Outcomes and Indicators as a New Challenge in Health Services Research: A Systematic Scoping Review

Cited by 22 publications

References 36 publications

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

Quality criteria/key components for high quality of diabetes management to avoid diabetes-related complications

Acceptability of employment readiness measures in youth and young adults on the autism spectrum: a mixed-methods study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About