Exploring the interpersonal-, organization-, and system-level factors that influence the implementation and use of an innovation-synoptic reporting-in cancer care

Abstract

BackgroundThe dominant method of reporting findings from diagnostic and surgical procedures is the narrative report. In cancer care, this report inconsistently provides the information required to understand the cancer and make informed patient care decisions. Another method of reporting, the synoptic report, captures specific data items in a structured manner and contains only items critical for patient care. Research demonstrates that synoptic reports vastly improve the quality of reporting. However, synoptic reporting represents a complex innovation in cancer care, with implementation and use requiring fundamental shifts in physician behaviour and practice, and support from the organization and larger system. The objective of this study is to examine the key interpersonal, organizational, and system-level factors that influence the implementation and use of synoptic reporting in cancer care.MethodsThis study involves three initiatives in Nova Scotia, Canada, that have implemented synoptic reporting within their departments/programs. Case study methodology will be used to study these initiatives (the cases) in-depth, explore which factors were barriers or facilitators of implementation and use, examine relationships amongst factors, and uncover which factors appear to be similar and distinct across cases. The cases were selected as they converge and differ with respect to factors that are likely to influence the implementation and use of an innovation in practice. Data will be collected through in-depth interviews, document analysis, observation of training sessions, and examination/use of the synoptic reporting tools. An audit will be performed to determine/quantify use. Analysis will involve production of a case record/history for each case, in-depth analysis of each case, and cross-case analysis, where findings will be compared and contrasted across cases to develop theoretically informed, generalisable knowledge that can be applied to other settings/contexts. Ethical approval was granted for this study.DiscussionThis study will contribute to our knowledge base on the multi-level factors, and the relationships amongst factors in specific contexts, that influence implementation and use of innovations such as synoptic reporting in healthcare. Such knowledge is critical to improving our understanding of implementation processes in clinical settings, and to helping researchers, clinicians, and managers/administrators develop and implement ways to more effectively integrate innovations into routine clinical care.

Enablers and barriers to using patient decision aids in early stage breast cancer consultations: a qualitative study of surgeons’ views

“…They suggest that researchers should also consider the impact of decision support tools on organizational resources. Others also suggest that organizational resources and partnerships are important for the uptake of complex interventions in practice [ 32 , 33 ]. While organizational resources are likely to be important for innovations of greater complexity, our findings suggest that the adoption of a PtDA was largely dependent on the views of the individual surgeon.…”

Facilitation roles and characteristics associated with research use by healthcare professionals: a scoping review

“… 1 Implementing evidence (ie, research findings) into practice is a complex, multifaceted process that requires a proactive effort to encourage use at the point of decision making. 2–4 Multilevel factors influence this implementation 5 ; some of these include individual (eg, education, attitude), 6–8 organisational/contextual, 9–14 system 14 and innovation-specific factors. 15 Several knowledge translation (KT) theories exist that can be used to guide the process of getting research evidence into practice.…”

Mixed-method study of a conceptual model of evidence-based intervention sustainment across multiple public-sector service settings

“…Although some models of implementation invoke sustainment as a key component [ 1 ], little empirical work has systematically examined factors that either facilitate or hinder EBI sustainment in public-sector services [ 11 ]. In a comprehensive review of the sustainment literature, both outer (system) and inner (organizational) contexts emerged as dominant features across conceptual models [ 12 ]. In particular, Klein and colleagues [ 13 ] identified management support, organizational supports, and fiscal resources as key elements for implementation effectiveness and sustainment.…”