背景:尽管上下文在实施科学中的重要性没有争议,关于外部环境变量对实施过程的实际影响的知识仍然相当分散。当前框架,模型,研究只是描述宏观层面的障碍和促进者,而不承认它们的动态特征以及它们如何影响和指导实施。将组织理论纳入实施框架可能是解决这一问题的一种方法。在这项研究中,因此,我们研究组织理论如何有助于我们理解外部环境变量如何塑造实施过程。我们以比利时面向目标的初级保健的实施过程为例。
方法:对来自各种初级保健组织的参与者进行了一项使用深入的半结构化访谈的定性研究。采用迭代方法收集和分析数据。我们评估了四种组织理论的潜力,以丰富我们对外部环境变量对实施过程的影响的理解。评估的组织理论如下:制度理论,资源依赖理论,网络理论,和权变理论。数据分析基于使用NVivo12的归纳和演绎主题分析技术的组合。
结果:制度理论有助于理解通过监管和政策措施引导和促进目标导向护理实施的机制。例如,佛兰德政府发布了促进更多一体化的政策,通过新成立的机构以人为中心的护理,激励机制,期望,和其他监管因素。其他三种组织理论描述了抵消或增强机制。金融系统阻碍了跨专业合作,这是GOC的关键。初级保健提供者与健康和/或社会护理组织之间的网络一方面促进GOC,而另一方面,缺乏支持跨专业合作的技术。人口老龄化,初级保健中工作量和复杂性的增加等或有变量造成了GOC作为可能答案的情况。
结论:从组织理论中得出的见解和命题可以用来扩展我们关于外部环境变量如何影响实施过程的知识。这些见解可以与现有的实现框架和模型结合或集成,以提高其解释能力。
BACKGROUND: Although the importance of context in implementation science is not disputed, knowledge about the actual impact of external context variables on implementation processes remains rather fragmented. Current frameworks, models, and studies merely describe macro-level barriers and facilitators, without acknowledging their dynamic character and how they impact and steer implementation. Including organizational theories in implementation frameworks could be a way of tackling this problem. In this study, we therefore investigate how organizational theories can contribute to our understanding of the ways in which external context variables shape implementation processes. We use the implementation process of goal-oriented primary care in Belgium as a case.
METHODS: A qualitative study using in-depth semi-structured interviews was conducted with actors from a variety of primary care organizations. Data was collected and analyzed with an iterative approach. We assessed the potential of four organizational theories to enrich our understanding of the impact of external context variables on implementation processes. The organizational theories assessed are as follows: institutional theory, resource dependency theory, network theory, and contingency theory. Data analysis was based on a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis techniques using NVivo 12.
RESULTS: Institutional theory helps to understand mechanisms that steer and facilitate the implementation of goal-oriented care through regulatory and policy measures. For example, the Flemish government issued policy for facilitating more integrated, person-centered care by means of newly created institutions, incentives, expectations, and other regulatory factors. The three other organizational theories describe both counteracting or reinforcing mechanisms. The financial system hampers interprofessional collaboration, which is key for GOC. Networks between primary care providers and health and/or social care organizations on the one hand facilitate GOC, while on the other hand, technology to support interprofessional collaboration is lacking. Contingent variables such as the aging population and increasing workload and complexity within primary care create circumstances in which GOC is presented as a possible answer.
CONCLUSIONS: Insights and propositions that derive from organizational theories can be utilized to expand our knowledge on how external context variables affect implementation processes. These insights can be combined with or integrated into existing implementation frameworks and models to increase their explanatory power.