King's College London

Research portal

The NICE alcohol misuse standard – evaluating its impact

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Alec Knight, Peter Littlejohns, Tara-Lynn Poole, Gillian Leng, Colin Drummond

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)260 -273
Number of pages14
JournalINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE
Volume30
Issue number3
Early online date18 Apr 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Documents

King's Authors

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore factors affecting implementing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) quality standard on alcohol misuse (QS11) and barriers and facilitators to its implementation.
Design/methodology/approach
Qualitative interview study analysed using directed and conventional content analyses. Participants were 38 individuals with experience of commissioning, delivering or using alcohol healthcare services in Southwark, Lambeth and Lewisham.
Findings
QS11 implementation ranged from no implementation to full implementation across the 13 statements. Implementation quality was also reported to vary widely across different settings. The analyses also uncovered numerous barriers and facilitators to implementing each statement. Overarching barriers to implementation included: inherent differences between specialist vs generalist settings; poor communication between healthcare settings; generic barriers to implementation; and poor governance structures and leadership.
Research limitations/implications
QS11 was created to summarise alcohol-related NICE guidance. The aim was to simplify guidance and enhance local implementation. However, in practice the standard requires complex actions by professionals. There was considerable variation in local alcohol commissioning models, which was associated with variation in implementation. These models warrant further evaluation to identify best practice.
Originality/value
Little evidence exists on the implementing quality standards, as distinct from clinical practice guidelines. The authors present direct evidence on quality standard implementation, identify implementation shortcomings and make recommendations for future research and practice.

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454