Changing hearts and minds: theorizing how, when, and under what conditions three social influence implementation strategies work.

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2024-09-05 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2024.1443955
Bryan J Weiner, Rosemary D Meza, Predrag Klasnja, Rebecca Lengnick-Hall, Gretchen J Buchanan, Aaron R Lyon, Kayne D Mettert, Marcella H Boynton, Byron J Powell, Cara C Lewis
{"title":"Changing hearts and minds: theorizing how, when, and under what conditions three social influence implementation strategies work.","authors":"Bryan J Weiner, Rosemary D Meza, Predrag Klasnja, Rebecca Lengnick-Hall, Gretchen J Buchanan, Aaron R Lyon, Kayne D Mettert, Marcella H Boynton, Byron J Powell, Cara C Lewis","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2024.1443955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Opinion leadership, educational outreach visiting, and innovation championing are commonly used strategies to address barriers to implementing innovations and evidence-based practices in healthcare settings. Despite voluminous research, ambiguities persist in how these strategies work and under what conditions they work well, work poorly, or work at all. The current paper develops middle-range theories to address this gap.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Conceptual articles, systematic reviews, and empirical studies informed the development of causal pathway diagrams (CPDs). CPDs are visualization tools for depicting and theorizing about the causal process through which strategies operate, including the mechanisms they activate, the barriers they address, and the proximal and distal outcomes they produce. CPDs also clarify the contextual conditions (i.e., preconditions and moderators) that influence whether, and to what extent, the strategy's causal process unfolds successfully. Expert panels of implementation scientists and health professionals rated the plausibility of these preliminary CPDs and offered comments and suggestions on them.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Theoretically, opinion leadership addresses potential adopters' uncertainty about likely consequences of innovation use (determinant) by promoting positive attitude formation about the innovation (mechanism), which results in an adoption decision (proximal outcome), which leads to innovation use (intermediate outcome). As this causal process repeats, penetration, or spread of innovation use, occurs (distal outcome). Educational outreach visiting addresses knowledge barriers, attitudinal barriers, and behavioral barriers (determinants) by promoting critical thinking and reflection about evidence and practice (mechanism), which results in behavioral intention (proximal outcome), behavior change (intermediate outcome), and fidelity, or guideline adherence (distal outcome). Innovation championing addresses organizational inertia, indifference, and resistance (determinants) by promoting buy-in to the vision, fostering a positive implementation climate, and increasing collective efficacy (mechanisms), which leads to participation in implementation activities (proximal outcome), initial use of the innovation with increasing skill (intermediate outcome) and, ultimately, greater penetration and fidelity (distal outcomes). Experts found the preliminary CPDs plausible or highly plausible and suggested additional mechanisms, moderators, and preconditions, which were used to amend the initial CPD.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The middle-range theories depicted in the CPDs furnish testable propositions for implementation research and offer guidance for selecting, designing, and evaluating these social influence implementation strategies in both research studies and practice settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"4 ","pages":"1443955"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11410765/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2024.1443955","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Opinion leadership, educational outreach visiting, and innovation championing are commonly used strategies to address barriers to implementing innovations and evidence-based practices in healthcare settings. Despite voluminous research, ambiguities persist in how these strategies work and under what conditions they work well, work poorly, or work at all. The current paper develops middle-range theories to address this gap.

Methods: Conceptual articles, systematic reviews, and empirical studies informed the development of causal pathway diagrams (CPDs). CPDs are visualization tools for depicting and theorizing about the causal process through which strategies operate, including the mechanisms they activate, the barriers they address, and the proximal and distal outcomes they produce. CPDs also clarify the contextual conditions (i.e., preconditions and moderators) that influence whether, and to what extent, the strategy's causal process unfolds successfully. Expert panels of implementation scientists and health professionals rated the plausibility of these preliminary CPDs and offered comments and suggestions on them.

Findings: Theoretically, opinion leadership addresses potential adopters' uncertainty about likely consequences of innovation use (determinant) by promoting positive attitude formation about the innovation (mechanism), which results in an adoption decision (proximal outcome), which leads to innovation use (intermediate outcome). As this causal process repeats, penetration, or spread of innovation use, occurs (distal outcome). Educational outreach visiting addresses knowledge barriers, attitudinal barriers, and behavioral barriers (determinants) by promoting critical thinking and reflection about evidence and practice (mechanism), which results in behavioral intention (proximal outcome), behavior change (intermediate outcome), and fidelity, or guideline adherence (distal outcome). Innovation championing addresses organizational inertia, indifference, and resistance (determinants) by promoting buy-in to the vision, fostering a positive implementation climate, and increasing collective efficacy (mechanisms), which leads to participation in implementation activities (proximal outcome), initial use of the innovation with increasing skill (intermediate outcome) and, ultimately, greater penetration and fidelity (distal outcomes). Experts found the preliminary CPDs plausible or highly plausible and suggested additional mechanisms, moderators, and preconditions, which were used to amend the initial CPD.

Discussion: The middle-range theories depicted in the CPDs furnish testable propositions for implementation research and offer guidance for selecting, designing, and evaluating these social influence implementation strategies in both research studies and practice settings.

改变人心:从理论上探讨三种社会影响实施策略如何、何时以及在何种条件下发挥作用。
背景:舆论引导、教育宣传访问和创新倡导是常用的策略,用以解决医疗机构在实施创新和循证实践时遇到的障碍。尽管进行了大量研究,但在这些策略如何发挥作用,以及在什么条件下效果好、效果差或根本不起作用等问题上,仍然存在模糊不清的地方。本文针对这一空白提出了中间理论:方法:概念性文章、系统性综述和实证研究为因果路径图(CPD)的开发提供了依据。因果路径图是一种可视化工具,用于描述战略运作的因果过程并将其理论化,包括战略激活的机制、战略解决的障碍以及战略产生的近端和远端结果。国家方案文件还阐明了影响战略因果过程是否以及在多大程度上成功展开的背景条件(即先决条件和调节因素)。由实施科学家和卫生专业人士组成的专家小组对这些初步 CPD 的合理性进行了评级,并提出了意见和建议:从理论上讲,舆论引导通过促进对创新的积极态度的形成(机制)来解决潜在采用者对使用创新可能产生的后果(决定因素)的不确定性,从而形成采用创新的决定(近端结果),进而导致创新的使用(中间结果)。随着这一因果过程的重复,创新使用的渗透或传播就会发生(远期结果)。教育推广访问通过促进对证据和实践的批判性思考和反思(机制)来解决知识障碍、态度障碍和行为障碍(决定因素),从而产生行为意向(近端结果)、行为改变(中间结果)和忠实性或指南遵守(远端结果)。创新倡导通过促进对愿景的认同、营造积极的实施氛围和提高集体效能(机制)来解决组织的惰性、冷漠和抵制(决定因素),从而导致参与实施活动(近端结果)、以不断提高的技能初步使用创新(中间结果),并最终提高渗透率和忠实度(远端结果)。专家们认为初步的国家方案文件合理或高度合理,并提出了其他机制、调节因素和先决条件,用于修正初步的国家方案文件:讨论:CPD 中描述的中程理论为实施研究提供了可检验的命题,并为在研究和实践环境中选择、设计和评估这些社会影响实施策略提供了指导。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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