The implementation of medical revalidation: an assessment using normalisation process theory

Abstract

BackgroundMedical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice.MethodsWe conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets.ResultsInitial lack of consensus over revalidation’s purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category).ConclusionsRequiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed.

Using Normalization Process Theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review

“…In Table 2 , we show that NPT was employed in in 82 uncontrolled studies, and these generated 90/130 (69.2%) articles [ 59 – 148 ]. These included feasibility studies ( n = 20) and process evaluations ( n = 54), and seven were what we have called ‘field studies’ which focused on general conditions in which interventions might take place, rather than the progress of specific interventions.…”

Application of normalisation process theory in understanding implementation processes in primary care settings in the UK: a systematic review

“…Among the articles in this review exploring NPT use in UK primary care settings, none used NPT to explore the entire implementation course of an intervention. However, this is not uncommon; May et al [21] in their recent review identified only one longitudinal study [62].…”

Using normalisation process theory to evaluate the implementation of a complex intervention to embed the surgical safety checklist

“…As a middle range theory, NPT has been increasingly applied to many different healthcare specialities and contexts, including mental health [ 13 ], allied health [ 14 ], acute healthcare [ 15 ], primary healthcare settings [ 16 , 17 ] and medical revalidation [ 18 ] as an explanatory model to guide the development and implementation of complex interventions. We chose the NPT as an explanatory model to explore and evaluate the implementation of a complex intervention in the Operating Room (OR) context.…”