Exploring Barriers, Enablers, and Strategies for Implementing Learning Health System Projects in Healthcare Organizations: A Multilevel Analysis in an Australian Setting

IF 2.3 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Louise Shaw, Meg Perrier, Kayley Lyons, Mikayla Wolfe, Rahul Barmanray, Daniel Capurro, Wendy Chapman, Sathana Dushyanthen
{"title":"Exploring Barriers, Enablers, and Strategies for Implementing Learning Health System Projects in Healthcare Organizations: A Multilevel Analysis in an Australian Setting","authors":"Louise Shaw,&nbsp;Meg Perrier,&nbsp;Kayley Lyons,&nbsp;Mikayla Wolfe,&nbsp;Rahul Barmanray,&nbsp;Daniel Capurro,&nbsp;Wendy Chapman,&nbsp;Sathana Dushyanthen","doi":"10.1002/lrh2.70103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To analyze the barriers, enablers, and strategies affecting the implementation of learning health systems (LHS) projects across individual (micro), organizational (meso), and system (macro) levels within Australian healthcare settings</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Semistructured interviews were conducted with 26 clinicians undertaking LHS projects in their organizations, as part of a LHS Academy fellowship program. Interviews were completed at two discrete time points: early in project implementation and again at project completion. They explored fellows' experiences with implementing LHS projects in real-world organizational contexts. Data were analyzed using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach guided by a multilevel ecological codebook developed by Shaw et al.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Participants' early interviews highlighted limited confidence, emerging leadership skills, and uncertainty in navigating implementation challenges, while later interviews described greater confidence, stronger leadership capability, and more refined adaptive strategies at the micro level. Organizational influences were described at both time points as slow and uneven, though later interviews included examples of small cultural shifts and early collaborative efforts alongside persistent constraints such as limited resources, siloed cultures, and inadequate digital infrastructure. At the system level, barriers including regulatory complexity, policy misalignment, and limited funding were reported consistently across both interviews and were perceived as largely unchanged.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Building individual capability was necessary but insufficient for successful LHS project implementation. Alignment across micro-, meso-, and macrolevels is critical, requiring parallel investment in organizational readiness, digital infrastructure, and policy reform. Fellowship programs may support individual change and foster proof-of-concept projects, but scaling impact demands coordinated, multilevel strategies.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":43916,"journal":{"name":"Learning Health Systems","volume":"10 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13364508/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lrh2.70103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To analyze the barriers, enablers, and strategies affecting the implementation of learning health systems (LHS) projects across individual (micro), organizational (meso), and system (macro) levels within Australian healthcare settings

Methods

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 26 clinicians undertaking LHS projects in their organizations, as part of a LHS Academy fellowship program. Interviews were completed at two discrete time points: early in project implementation and again at project completion. They explored fellows' experiences with implementing LHS projects in real-world organizational contexts. Data were analyzed using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach guided by a multilevel ecological codebook developed by Shaw et al.

Results

Participants' early interviews highlighted limited confidence, emerging leadership skills, and uncertainty in navigating implementation challenges, while later interviews described greater confidence, stronger leadership capability, and more refined adaptive strategies at the micro level. Organizational influences were described at both time points as slow and uneven, though later interviews included examples of small cultural shifts and early collaborative efforts alongside persistent constraints such as limited resources, siloed cultures, and inadequate digital infrastructure. At the system level, barriers including regulatory complexity, policy misalignment, and limited funding were reported consistently across both interviews and were perceived as largely unchanged.

Conclusions

Building individual capability was necessary but insufficient for successful LHS project implementation. Alignment across micro-, meso-, and macrolevels is critical, requiring parallel investment in organizational readiness, digital infrastructure, and policy reform. Fellowship programs may support individual change and foster proof-of-concept projects, but scaling impact demands coordinated, multilevel strategies.

探索障碍,促进因素,以及在医疗保健组织实施学习卫生系统项目的策略:在澳大利亚设置的多层次分析。
目的:分析澳大利亚医疗环境中影响学习卫生系统(LHS)项目在个人(微观)、组织(中观)和系统(宏观)层面实施的障碍、推动因素和策略。方法:作为LHS学院奖学金计划的一部分,对26名在其组织中从事LHS项目的临床医生进行了半结构化访谈。访谈在两个离散的时间点完成:项目实施初期和项目完成时。他们探讨了研究员在实际组织环境中实施LHS项目的经验。结果:参与者的早期访谈强调了有限的信心、新兴的领导技能和应对实施挑战的不确定性,而随后的访谈则描述了更大的信心、更强的领导能力和更精细的微观适应策略。在这两个时间点上,组织的影响都被描述为缓慢和不平衡的,尽管后来的采访包括了一些例子,比如文化的小转变和早期的合作努力,以及资源有限、文化孤立和数字基础设施不足等持续的制约因素。在系统层面,包括监管复杂性、政策偏差和有限的资金在内的障碍在两次访谈中都得到了一致的报告,并且被认为基本没有变化。结论:培养个人能力是必要的,但不足以成功实施LHS项目。跨微观、中观和宏观层面的协调是至关重要的,需要在组织准备、数字基础设施和政策改革方面进行平行投资。奖学金项目可以支持个人变革和促进概念验证项目,但扩大影响需要协调的多层次战略。
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
Learning Health Systems
Learning Health Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
22.60%
发文量
55
审稿时长
20 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书