Teamwork and implementation of innovations in healthcare and human service settings: a systematic review.

IF 8.8 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Elizabeth A McGuier, David J Kolko, Gregory A Aarons, Allison Schachter, Mary Lou Klem, Matthew A Diabes, Laurie R Weingart, Eduardo Salas, Courtney Benjamin Wolk
{"title":"Teamwork and implementation of innovations in healthcare and human service settings: a systematic review.","authors":"Elizabeth A McGuier, David J Kolko, Gregory A Aarons, Allison Schachter, Mary Lou Klem, Matthew A Diabes, Laurie R Weingart, Eduardo Salas, Courtney Benjamin Wolk","doi":"10.1186/s13012-024-01381-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementation of new practices in team-based settings requires teams to work together to respond to new demands and changing expectations. However, team constructs and team-based implementation approaches have received little attention in the implementation science literature. This systematic review summarizes empirical research examining associations between teamwork and implementation outcomes when evidence-based practices and other innovations are implemented in healthcare and human service settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO and ERIC for peer-reviewed empirical articles published from January 2000 to March 2022. Additional articles were identified by searches of reference lists and a cited reference search for included articles (completed in February 2023). We selected studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods to examine associations between team constructs and implementation outcomes in healthcare and human service settings. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess methodological quality/risk of bias and conducted a narrative synthesis of included studies. GRADE and GRADE-CERQual were used to assess the strength of the body of evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Searches identified 10,489 results. After review, 58 articles representing 55 studies were included. Relevant studies increased over time; 71% of articles were published after 2016. We were unable to generate estimates of effects for any quantitative associations because of very limited overlap in the reported associations between team variables and implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings with high confidence were: 1) Staffing shortages and turnover hinder implementation; 2) Adaptive team functioning (i.e., positive affective states, effective behavior processes, shared cognitive states) facilitates implementation and is associated with better implementation outcomes; Problems in team functioning (i.e., negative affective states, problematic behavioral processes, lack of shared cognitive states) act as barriers to implementation and are associated with poor implementation outcomes; and 3) Open, ongoing, and effective communication within teams facilitates implementation of new practices; poor communication is a barrier.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Teamwork matters for implementation. However, both team constructs and implementation outcomes were often poorly specified, and there was little overlap of team constructs and implementation outcomes studied in quantitative studies. Greater specificity and rigor are needed to understand how teamwork influences implementation processes and outcomes. We provide recommendations for improving the conceptualization, description, assessment, analysis, and interpretation of research on teams implementing innovations.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Registration number: </strong>CRD42020220168.</p>","PeriodicalId":54995,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science","volume":"19 1","pages":"49"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11247800/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01381-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Implementation of new practices in team-based settings requires teams to work together to respond to new demands and changing expectations. However, team constructs and team-based implementation approaches have received little attention in the implementation science literature. This systematic review summarizes empirical research examining associations between teamwork and implementation outcomes when evidence-based practices and other innovations are implemented in healthcare and human service settings.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO and ERIC for peer-reviewed empirical articles published from January 2000 to March 2022. Additional articles were identified by searches of reference lists and a cited reference search for included articles (completed in February 2023). We selected studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods to examine associations between team constructs and implementation outcomes in healthcare and human service settings. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess methodological quality/risk of bias and conducted a narrative synthesis of included studies. GRADE and GRADE-CERQual were used to assess the strength of the body of evidence.

Results: Searches identified 10,489 results. After review, 58 articles representing 55 studies were included. Relevant studies increased over time; 71% of articles were published after 2016. We were unable to generate estimates of effects for any quantitative associations because of very limited overlap in the reported associations between team variables and implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings with high confidence were: 1) Staffing shortages and turnover hinder implementation; 2) Adaptive team functioning (i.e., positive affective states, effective behavior processes, shared cognitive states) facilitates implementation and is associated with better implementation outcomes; Problems in team functioning (i.e., negative affective states, problematic behavioral processes, lack of shared cognitive states) act as barriers to implementation and are associated with poor implementation outcomes; and 3) Open, ongoing, and effective communication within teams facilitates implementation of new practices; poor communication is a barrier.

Conclusions: Teamwork matters for implementation. However, both team constructs and implementation outcomes were often poorly specified, and there was little overlap of team constructs and implementation outcomes studied in quantitative studies. Greater specificity and rigor are needed to understand how teamwork influences implementation processes and outcomes. We provide recommendations for improving the conceptualization, description, assessment, analysis, and interpretation of research on teams implementing innovations.

Trial registration: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews.

Registration number: CRD42020220168.

医疗保健和人类服务环境中的团队合作与创新实施:系统综述。
背景:在以团队为基础的环境中实施新的实践活动需要团队共同努力,以应对新的需求和不断变化的期望。然而,团队建设和基于团队的实施方法在实施科学文献中很少受到关注。本系统性综述总结了在医疗保健和人类服务环境中实施循证实践和其他创新时,团队合作与实施结果之间相关性的实证研究:我们检索了 MEDLINE、CINAHL、APA PsycINFO 和 ERIC 中 2000 年 1 月至 2022 年 3 月期间发表的经同行评审的实证文章。通过对参考文献目录的检索和对已收录文章的引用参考文献检索(2023 年 2 月完成),我们还发现了其他文章。我们选择了使用定量、定性或混合方法来研究医疗保健和人类服务环境中团队建设与实施结果之间关系的研究。我们使用 "混合方法评估工具 "来评估方法质量/偏倚风险,并对纳入的研究进行了叙述性综合。使用 GRADE 和 GRADE-CERQual 评估证据的强度:搜索共发现 10,489 项结果。经审查后,纳入了代表 55 项研究的 58 篇文章。相关研究随着时间的推移而增加;71%的文章发表于2016年之后。由于所报告的团队变量与实施结果之间的关联重叠非常有限,我们无法对任何定量关联产生效果估计。可信度较高的定性研究结果有1)人员短缺和更替阻碍了实施;2)团队的适应性运作(即积极的情感状态、有效的行为过程、共享的认知状态)促进了实施,并与更好的实施结果相关;团队运作中的问题(即消极的情感状态、有问题的行为过程、缺乏共享的认知状态)成为实施的障碍,并与较差的实施结果相关;以及3)团队内开放、持续和有效的沟通促进了新实践的实施;沟通不畅是一个障碍:结论:团队合作对实施至关重要。然而,团队建设和实施结果往往不够明确,定量研究中团队建设和实施结果的重叠很少。要了解团队合作如何影响实施过程和结果,需要更具体、更严谨的研究。我们为改进有关团队实施创新的研究的概念化、描述、评估、分析和解释提供了建议:本系统综述已在国际前瞻性系统综述注册中心 PROSPERO 注册:CRD42020220168。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Implementation Science
Implementation Science 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
14.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
78
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Implementation Science is a leading journal committed to disseminating evidence on methods for integrating research findings into routine healthcare practice and policy. It offers a multidisciplinary platform for studying implementation strategies, encompassing their development, outcomes, economics, processes, and associated factors. The journal prioritizes rigorous studies and innovative, theory-based approaches, covering implementation science across various healthcare services and settings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信