User evaluation of an implementation toolkit for maternal-newborn care settings.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jbi Evidence Implementation Pub Date : 2026-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-03 DOI:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000541
Jessica Reszel, Carolina Lavin Venegas, Sandra I Dunn, Christine E Cassidy, Janet Brownlee, Mireille Cloutier, Olivia Daub, Kaamel Hafizi, Marnie Lightfoot, Dahlia Pervez, Ashley Quosdorf, Allison Wood, Ian D Graham
{"title":"User evaluation of an implementation toolkit for maternal-newborn care settings.","authors":"Jessica Reszel, Carolina Lavin Venegas, Sandra I Dunn, Christine E Cassidy, Janet Brownlee, Mireille Cloutier, Olivia Daub, Kaamel Hafizi, Marnie Lightfoot, Dahlia Pervez, Ashley Quosdorf, Allison Wood, Ian D Graham","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and aims: </strong>Applying knowledge generated from implementation science can improve the process teams use to move evidence into practice. To facilitate the use of implementation science knowledge in practice, training and resources for health care providers and leaders are needed. Our team developed a toolkit for maternal-newborn settings to provide guidance and tools on how to apply implementation science knowledge to their practice change initiatives. The aim of this study was to evaluate the toolkit for acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, usability, and potential adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study. Health care providers and leaders working in Ontario maternal-newborn care read the toolkit and completed a feedback survey and interview. The questionnaire included questions on toolkit content and format and validated measures on acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and usability. The interviews explored questionnaire responses and application of the toolkit. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively. Qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants (n = 17) rated the toolkit as acceptable, appropriate, feasible, and usable, indicating the toolkit met the need for practical resources to guide implementation. Most participants indicated their intention to use the toolkit and refer it to others. Several areas for improvement were identified, including simplifying language and content and improving the format. Participants highlighted the need to effectively disseminate the toolkit and offer training and support for its successful implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The toolkit has the potential to improve maternal-newborn teams' implementation processes and outcomes. Future work is needed to improve the toolkit and evaluate its use and impact in practice.</p><p><strong>Spanish abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A431.</p>","PeriodicalId":48473,"journal":{"name":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","volume":" ","pages":"414-430"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000541","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and aims: Applying knowledge generated from implementation science can improve the process teams use to move evidence into practice. To facilitate the use of implementation science knowledge in practice, training and resources for health care providers and leaders are needed. Our team developed a toolkit for maternal-newborn settings to provide guidance and tools on how to apply implementation science knowledge to their practice change initiatives. The aim of this study was to evaluate the toolkit for acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, usability, and potential adoption.

Methods: We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study. Health care providers and leaders working in Ontario maternal-newborn care read the toolkit and completed a feedback survey and interview. The questionnaire included questions on toolkit content and format and validated measures on acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and usability. The interviews explored questionnaire responses and application of the toolkit. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively. Qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis.

Results: Participants (n = 17) rated the toolkit as acceptable, appropriate, feasible, and usable, indicating the toolkit met the need for practical resources to guide implementation. Most participants indicated their intention to use the toolkit and refer it to others. Several areas for improvement were identified, including simplifying language and content and improving the format. Participants highlighted the need to effectively disseminate the toolkit and offer training and support for its successful implementation.

Conclusions: The toolkit has the potential to improve maternal-newborn teams' implementation processes and outcomes. Future work is needed to improve the toolkit and evaluate its use and impact in practice.

Spanish abstract: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A431.

对孕产妇-新生儿保健环境实施工具包的用户评价。
介绍和目的:应用从实现科学中产生的知识可以改进团队用于将证据转化为实践的过程。为了促进在实践中使用实施科学知识,需要为医疗保健提供者和领导者提供培训和资源。我们的团队为孕产妇和新生儿环境开发了一个工具包,为如何将实施科学知识应用于其实践变革举措提供指导和工具。本研究的目的是评估工具包的可接受性、适当性、可行性、可用性和潜在的采用。方法:我们进行了一项收敛混合方法研究。在安大略省妇幼保健部门工作的医疗保健提供者和领导阅读了工具包,并完成了反馈调查和访谈。问卷调查包括关于工具包内容和格式的问题,以及关于可接受性、适当性、可行性和可用性的验证措施。访谈探讨了问卷的回答和工具包的应用。定量数据进行描述性分析。定性数据采用定向内容分析进行分析。结果:参与者(n = 17)评价该工具包为可接受的、适当的、可行的和可用的,表明该工具包满足指导实施的实际资源的需求。大多数参与者表示他们打算使用该工具包并将其推荐给其他人。确定了几个需要改进的领域,包括简化语言和内容以及改进格式。与会者强调有必要有效传播该工具包,并为其成功实施提供培训和支持。结论:该工具包有可能改善孕产妇-新生儿团队的实施过程和结果;未来的工作需要改进该工具包并评估其在实践中的使用和影响。西班牙文摘要:http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A431。
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
3.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
23
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书