IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i3p987-d316605.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Setting Priorities to Inform Assessment of Care Homes’ Readiness to Participate in Healthcare Innovation: A Systematic Mapping Review and Consensus Process

Author

Listed:
  • Frances Bunn

    (Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK)

  • Claire Goodman

    (Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK)

  • Kirsten Corazzini

    (University of Maryland School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA)

  • Rachel Sharpe

    (Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK)

  • Melanie Handley

    (Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK)

  • Jennifer Lynch

    (Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK)

  • Julienne Meyer

    (Care for Older People, City, University of London, London EC1V OHB, UK)

  • Tom Dening

    (Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK)

  • Adam L Gordon

    (Division of Medical Sciences and Graduate Entry Medicine, University of Nottingham, Derby DE22 3NE, UK)

Abstract

Organisational context is known to impact on the successful implementation of healthcare initiatives in care homes. We undertook a systematic mapping review to examine whether researchers have considered organisational context when planning, conducting, and reporting the implementation of healthcare innovations in care homes. Review data were mapped against the Alberta Context Tool, which was designed to assess organizational context in care homes. The review included 56 papers. No studies involved a systematic assessment of organisational context prior to implementation, but many provided post hoc explanations of how organisational context affected the success or otherwise of the innovation. Factors identified to explain a lack of success included poor senior staff engagement, non-alignment with care home culture, limited staff capacity to engage, and low levels of participation from health professionals such as general practitioners (GPs). Thirty-five stakeholders participated in workshops to discuss findings and develop questions for assessing care home readiness to participate in innovations. Ten questions were developed to initiate conversations between innovators and care home staff to support research and implementation. This framework can help researchers initiate discussions about health-related innovation. This will begin to address the gap between implementation theory and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Frances Bunn & Claire Goodman & Kirsten Corazzini & Rachel Sharpe & Melanie Handley & Jennifer Lynch & Julienne Meyer & Tom Dening & Adam L Gordon, 2020. "Setting Priorities to Inform Assessment of Care Homes’ Readiness to Participate in Healthcare Innovation: A Systematic Mapping Review and Consensus Process," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:987-:d:316605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/987/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/987/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suzanne Meeks & Kimberly Van Haitsma & Ben Schoenbachler & Stephen W. Looney, 2015. "BE-ACTIV for Depression in Nursing Homes: Primary Outcomes of a Randomized Clinical Trial," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 70(1), pages 13-23.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lucy Johnston & Heidi Koikkalainen & Lynda Anderson & Paul Lapok & Alistair Lawson & Susan D. Shenkin, 2022. "Foundation Level Barriers to the Widespread Adoption of Digital Solutions by Care Homes: Insights from Three Scottish Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-9, June.
    2. Charlèss Dupont & Robrecht De Schreye & Joachim Cohen & Mark De Ridder & Lieve Van den Block & Luc Deliens & Kathleen Leemans, 2021. "Pilot Study to Develop and Test Palliative Care Quality Indicators for Nursing Homes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-15, January.
    3. Sarah Damery & Sarah Flanagan & Janet Jones & Kate Jolly, 2021. "The Effect of Providing Staff Training and Enhanced Support to Care Homes on Care Processes, Safety Climate and Avoidable Harms: Evaluation of a Care Home Quality Improvement Programme in England," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Reena Devi & Adam Gordon & Tom Dening, 2022. "Enhancing the Quality of Care in Long-Term Care Settings," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-3, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mona Diegelmann & Hans-Werner Wahl & Oliver K. Schilling & Carl-Philipp Jansen & Eva-Luisa Schnabel & Klaus Hauer, 2018. "Understanding depressive symptoms in nursing home residents: the role of frequency and enjoyability of different expanded everyday activities relevant to the nursing home setting," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 339-348, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:987-:d:316605. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.