Using the implementation research logic model to examine high-intensity resistance rehabilitation implementation in skilled nursing facilities: a mixed methods multi-site case study.

Lauren A Hinrichs-Kinney, Danielle Derlein, Mattie E Pontiff, Daniel Malone, Jodi Summers Holtrop, Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley
{"title":"Using the implementation research logic model to examine high-intensity resistance rehabilitation implementation in skilled nursing facilities: a mixed methods multi-site case study.","authors":"Lauren A Hinrichs-Kinney, Danielle Derlein, Mattie E Pontiff, Daniel Malone, Jodi Summers Holtrop, Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley","doi":"10.1186/s43058-025-00747-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementing evidence-based rehabilitation in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) is essential for enhancing physical function outcomes and mitigating risk of adverse events. Best implementation approaches in this complex setting are unknown. This study uses the Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) to retrospectively examine the implementation of high-intensity resistance rehabilitation (HIR) in SNFs, aiming to elucidate contextual factors and pathways that could enhance future HIR implementation endeavors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a convergent, mixed-methods multi-site case study (n = 8 sites). A standardized implementation strategy was employed, allowing sites to adapt this approach. HIR use was measured using the Provider Report of Sustainment Scale (PRESS). Contextual factors were identified using the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) through study-specific questionnaires and validated measures (Inner Setting Scale, Provider Perspective of Team Effectiveness, Evidence Based Practice Attitudes Scale, Perceived Characteristics of Intervention Scale, Self-Defined Burnout Measure, and Utrecht Engagement Scale), and analyzed descriptively. Interviews and focus groups with leadership and clinicians revealed contextual factors and strategies influencing implementation. Heat maps visualized site patterns, while an IRLM proposed provisional implementation pathways.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PRESS scores ranged from 3.75 (0.17) to 2.33 (0.67), indicating all sites implemented HIR to at least a \"moderate extent\". Higher-implementing sites demonstrated full-team ability to adapt HIR to diverse patients. Differentiating contextual factors between higher and lower implementing sites included clinician perspectives, site infrastructure, and satisfaction with leadership. Higher-implementing sites employed a higher volume of site-initiated implementation strategies, notably having a champion and patient engagement. Pathways that appeared to contribute to higher implementation extent included: 1) overcoming inertia of current practice through HIR salience, 2) overcoming clinician concerns of patient compatibility through affirmative experiences, 3) addressing clinician perspective of complexity with session planning, and 4) optimizing patient rehabilitation mindset through encouraging environments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Improving physical function in older adults necessitates adoption of evidence-based rehabilitation like HIR. Implementation strategies that target infrastructure, including leadership support and communication channels, inertia of current practice, and clinician perspectives of HIR complexity and patient compatibility may facilitate implementation. Identifying a champion and providing guidance for effective patient engagement appear to be key.</p>","PeriodicalId":73355,"journal":{"name":"Implementation science communications","volume":"6 1","pages":"62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12096742/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation science communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-025-00747-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Implementing evidence-based rehabilitation in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) is essential for enhancing physical function outcomes and mitigating risk of adverse events. Best implementation approaches in this complex setting are unknown. This study uses the Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) to retrospectively examine the implementation of high-intensity resistance rehabilitation (HIR) in SNFs, aiming to elucidate contextual factors and pathways that could enhance future HIR implementation endeavors.

Methods: We conducted a convergent, mixed-methods multi-site case study (n = 8 sites). A standardized implementation strategy was employed, allowing sites to adapt this approach. HIR use was measured using the Provider Report of Sustainment Scale (PRESS). Contextual factors were identified using the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) through study-specific questionnaires and validated measures (Inner Setting Scale, Provider Perspective of Team Effectiveness, Evidence Based Practice Attitudes Scale, Perceived Characteristics of Intervention Scale, Self-Defined Burnout Measure, and Utrecht Engagement Scale), and analyzed descriptively. Interviews and focus groups with leadership and clinicians revealed contextual factors and strategies influencing implementation. Heat maps visualized site patterns, while an IRLM proposed provisional implementation pathways.

Results: PRESS scores ranged from 3.75 (0.17) to 2.33 (0.67), indicating all sites implemented HIR to at least a "moderate extent". Higher-implementing sites demonstrated full-team ability to adapt HIR to diverse patients. Differentiating contextual factors between higher and lower implementing sites included clinician perspectives, site infrastructure, and satisfaction with leadership. Higher-implementing sites employed a higher volume of site-initiated implementation strategies, notably having a champion and patient engagement. Pathways that appeared to contribute to higher implementation extent included: 1) overcoming inertia of current practice through HIR salience, 2) overcoming clinician concerns of patient compatibility through affirmative experiences, 3) addressing clinician perspective of complexity with session planning, and 4) optimizing patient rehabilitation mindset through encouraging environments.

Conclusion: Improving physical function in older adults necessitates adoption of evidence-based rehabilitation like HIR. Implementation strategies that target infrastructure, including leadership support and communication channels, inertia of current practice, and clinician perspectives of HIR complexity and patient compatibility may facilitate implementation. Identifying a champion and providing guidance for effective patient engagement appear to be key.

运用实施研究逻辑模型考察熟练护理机构高强度抵抗性康复实施:混合方法多地点案例研究。
背景:在熟练护理机构(snf)实施循证康复对于提高身体功能结局和减轻不良事件风险至关重要。在这种复杂的环境中,最佳的实现方法是未知的。本研究使用实施研究逻辑模型(IRLM)对snf中高强度抵抗康复(HIR)的实施进行回顾性研究,旨在阐明可能增强未来HIR实施努力的背景因素和途径。方法:我们进行了一项融合、混合方法的多地点案例研究(n = 8个地点)。采用了标准化的实现策略,允许站点适应这种方法。HIR的使用使用提供者维持量表报告(PRESS)进行测量。本研究采用实用稳健实施与可持续性模型(PRISM),通过问卷调查和验证量表(内部设定量表、团队效能提供者视角、循证实践态度量表、干预感知特征量表、自定义倦怠量表和乌得勒支敬业量表)识别情境因素,并对其进行描述性分析。与领导和临床医生的访谈和焦点小组揭示了影响实施的背景因素和策略。热图可视化了站点模式,而IRLM提出了临时实施路径。结果:PRESS评分范围从3.75(0.17)到2.33(0.67),表明所有站点实施HIR至少“中等程度”。高实施点显示了全团队适应不同患者HIR的能力。区分较高和较低实施地点之间的环境因素包括临床医生的观点、地点基础设施和对领导的满意度。高实施率的站点采用了大量的站点发起的实施策略,特别是有拥护者和患者参与。促进实施程度的途径包括:1)通过HIR突出克服当前实践的惯性,2)通过积极体验克服临床医生对患者兼容性的关注,3)通过会话计划解决临床医生对复杂性的看法,以及4)通过鼓励环境优化患者的康复心态。结论:改善老年人身体功能需要采用HIR等循证康复治疗。以基础设施为目标的实施策略,包括领导支持和沟通渠道、当前实践的惯性以及临床医生对HIR复杂性和患者兼容性的看法,可能有助于实施。确定拥护者并为有效的患者参与提供指导似乎是关键。
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
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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