Research & Impact
Evidence That Drives Real Change
Authors: Yulia Lin, Wendy Levinson, Doreen Day, Ryan Lett, Tanya Petraszko, Tai Huynh, Andrea M Patey.
Year: 2024
Abstract:
Background: Up to 50% of blood is transfused inappropriately despite best evidence. In 2020, Choosing Wisely Canada launched a major national programme, ‘Using Blood Wisely’, the aim was to engage hospitals to audit their red blood cell transfusion use against national benchmarks and participate in a programme to decrease inappropriate use.
Study design: Using Blood Wisely is a quality improvement programme including national benchmarks, an audit tool, recommended evidence-based effective interventions and a designation to reward success. Hospital engagement was measured using the number of hospitals signing up, performing a baseline audit, submitting the planning survey, entering two or more audits and achieving hospital designation. Barriers to implementation were collected.
Results: From 1 September 2020 to 31 December 2022, 229 individual hospitals signed up over time to participate. Their results are reported as 159 hospitals and hospital groups. Collectively, this accounts for 72% of the blood used in Canada. Overall, 147 (92%) performed a baseline audit, 10 (6%) submitted a planning survey and 130 (82%) entered two or more audits. At baseline (time of enrolment), 75 (51%) met both benchmarks. The designation was awarded to 62 (39%) hospital groups (a total of 105 individual hospitals) that met and sustained benchmarks. Barriers to implementation included human resource shortages, lack of local expertise to advise the team, need for more education of transfusion prescribers and competing priorities.
Conclusion: In its initial phase, Using Blood Wisely engaged a substantial number of hospitals in transfusion quality improvement work and maintained that engagement. This large-scale engagement across a big country was more successful than anticipated. Additional efforts are needed to rigorously evaluate the programme’s impact on utilisation.
Authors: Daniëlle Kroon, Simone A van Dulmen, Gert P Westert, Patrick P T Jeurissen, Rudolf B Kool
Year: 2022
Abstract:
Objective: We aimed to increase the understanding of the scaling of de-implementation strategies by identifying the determinants of the process and developing a determinant framework.
Design and methods: This study has a mixed-methods design. First, we performed an integrative review to build a literature-based framework describing the determinants of the scaling of healthcare innovations and interventions. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies from 1995 to December 2020. We systematically extracted the determinants of the scaling of interventions and developed a literature-based framework. Subsequently, this framework was discussed in four focus groups with national and international de-implementation experts. The literature-based framework was complemented by the findings of the focus group meetings and adapted for the scaling of de-implementation strategies.
Results: The literature search resulted in 42 articles that discussed the determinants of the scaling of innovations and interventions. No articles described determinants specifically for de-implementation strategies. During the focus groups, all participants agreed on the relevance of the extracted determinants for the scaling of de-implementation strategies. The experts emphasised that while the determinants are relevant for various countries, the implications differ due to different contexts, cultures and histories. The analyses of the focus groups resulted in additional topics and determinants, namely, medical training, professional networks, interests of stakeholders, clinical guidelines and patients’ perspectives. The results of the focus group meetings were combined with the literature framework, which together formed the supporting the scaling of de-implementation strategies (SPREAD) framework. The SPREAD framework includes determinants from four domains: (1) scaling plan, (2) external context, (3) de-implementation strategy and (4) adopters.
Conclusions: The SPREAD framework describes the determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies. These determinants are potential targets for various parties to facilitate the scaling of de-implementation strategies. Future research should validate these determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies.