Abstract
Objectives: To test the applicability of the model of diffusion of innovations as an analytical framework to explore the implementation of evidence based thrombolysis services for stroke patients.
Methods: Four empirical case studies of the implementation of evidence into stroke services in England and Sweden. Data were drawn from 95 semi structured interviews with a range of clinical and managerial staff within four hospitals, working in stroke units, emergency medicine, radiology, the ambulance service, community rehabilitation services and community medicine.
Results: The implementation of thrombolysis in acute stroke management benefited from a critical mass of factors featured within the model including, the support of national and local opinion leaders, a strong evidence base and financial incentives. However, while the model provided a starting point as an organizational framework for mapping the critical factors influencing implementation, to properly understand the process of implementation and explore the importance of the different factors identified requires a more fine grained analyses of context and, in particular, of the human and social dimensions of change.
Conclusions: While recognising the importance of models in mapping the processes by which the diffusion of innovations occurs, future studies would benefit from a greater use of methods that lend themselves to in-depth analysis such as ethnography and the application of relevant bodies of social theory.
Methods: Four empirical case studies of the implementation of evidence into stroke services in England and Sweden. Data were drawn from 95 semi structured interviews with a range of clinical and managerial staff within four hospitals, working in stroke units, emergency medicine, radiology, the ambulance service, community rehabilitation services and community medicine.
Results: The implementation of thrombolysis in acute stroke management benefited from a critical mass of factors featured within the model including, the support of national and local opinion leaders, a strong evidence base and financial incentives. However, while the model provided a starting point as an organizational framework for mapping the critical factors influencing implementation, to properly understand the process of implementation and explore the importance of the different factors identified requires a more fine grained analyses of context and, in particular, of the human and social dimensions of change.
Conclusions: While recognising the importance of models in mapping the processes by which the diffusion of innovations occurs, future studies would benefit from a greater use of methods that lend themselves to in-depth analysis such as ethnography and the application of relevant bodies of social theory.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 229-234 |
| Journal | Journal of health services research & policy |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Early online date | 22 Mar 2016 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2016 |
Keywords
- implementation, diffusion of innovations, models
