Learning Collaboratives: Insights And A New Taxonomy From AHRQ’s Two Decades Of Experience

Abstract

Learning collaboratives are increasingly used as mechanisms to support and hasten the diffusion and implementation of innovation, clinical evidence, and effective models of care. Factors contributing to the collaboratives' success or failure are poorly understood. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has sponsored collaboratives for nearly two decades to support improvements in health care quality and value by accelerating the diffusion and implementation of innovation. We examined AHRQ's experience with these collaboratives to characterize their attributes, identify factors that might contribute to their success or failure, and assess the challenges they encountered. Building on the literature and insights from AHRQ's experience, we propose a taxonomy that can offer guidance to decision makers and funders about the factors they should consider in developing collaboratives and planning their evaluation, as well as to researchers who seek to conduct research that will ultimately help decision makers make better investments in diffusing innovation and evidence.

Comparing and contrasting ‘innovation platforms’ with other forms of professional networks for strengthening primary healthcare systems for Indigenous Australians

“…They tend to be focused at the clinical microsystem level in small, functional front-line units that provide most healthcare to most people. 8 However, a recent publication by Nix et al 9 renews the call for expanded multidisciplinary networks that have both a system-wide lens, and include policymakers, researchers and health services. These authors also highlight the gap in the literature on understanding the factors that contribute to network effectiveness.…”

“…These authors also highlight the gap in the literature on understanding the factors that contribute to network effectiveness. 9 …”

Contextual Factors and Mechanisms that Influence Sustainability: A Realist Evaluation of Two Provincially Scaled Evidence-Based Initiatives

“…Similar to other research, our ndings suggest that creating a culture of continuous learning, promoting accountability, and creating an inter-organizational support network from which sites can learn from others' successes and challenges are some of the main bene ts of LCs (37). Despite the bene ts of LCs identi ed in our study, and others, questions remain about the effectiveness of LCs for behavior change, the use of skills gained in the LCs, the impact of LC for sustained improvement, the effectiveness of LCs as a strategy for sustainability and the and cost-analyses of LCs over time (35,37,38).…”

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Checklist and Learning Collaborative to Promote Quality and Safety in the Perinatal Care of Women with Opioid Use Disorders

“…Practice facilitation is defined as a supportive service, incorporating quality and practice improvement methods, to build the internal capability of a practice to optimize care . Two common facilitation approaches include providing just‐in‐time information to clinicians in the form of prompts, templates, or other reminders built into electronic health record (EHR) systems, intended to increase the likelihood that care will be consistent with accepted best practice, and providing ready access from the EHR to resources such as guidelines, educational materials, and other tools for clinicians …”

“…Common elements of learning collaboratives that are associated with successful implementation of interventions and improved outcomes for patients include the development of a community of practice through synchronous meetings, either virtually or in person; an interprofessional approach; targeted educational programs to support programs of interventions; promotion of Plan, Do, Study, Act cycles for local adaptation of interventions; and using standard measures across sites with feedback and comparison of results …”