Use of the PARIHS Framework for Retrospective and Prospective Implementation Evaluations

Abstract

The descriptive case study presented here underscores the value of a theory-guided approach to implementation and highlights that PARIHS can help implementers understand factors impacting implementation, identify areas for future intervention, and inform selection of strategies to support or enhance implementation efforts.

Evaluation frameworks in health services: An integrative review of use, attributes and elements

“…Twenty papers referred to nine different existing frameworks and five to the development of frameworks for evaluation of specific initiatives. Studies came from a wide range of locations: seven from the UK (Adegoke, Hofman, Kongnyuy, & van den Broek, ; Byng, Norman, Redfern, & Jones, ; Dickerson, Green, & Blass, ; Froggatt & Hockley, ; Furness et al., ; MacArthur, ; Themessl‐Huber, Lazenbatt, & Taylor, ), six from USA (Bahr et al., ; Eisenbise, ; Hill et al., ; Hundley, ; Serowoky, George, & Yarandi, ; Sockolow, ), three from Australia (Gardner, Gardner, & O'Connell, ; Hungerford, Prosser, & Davey, ; Wand, White, & Patching, ), two from Canada (Bainbridge, Brazil, Ploeg, Krueger, & Taniguchi, ; Yonge, Myrick, & Ferguson, ), two from Switzerland (Bryant‐Lukosius et al., ; Chmiel, Shaha, & Schneider, ) and one each from Africa (Bergstrom et al., ), Norway (Varsi, Ekstedt, Gammon, & Ruland, ), Spain (Oroviogoicoechea & Watson, ), Sweden (Frykman, von Thiele Schwarz, Muntlin Athlin, Hasson, & Mazzocato, ) and Thailand (Jaipakdee, Jiamjarasrangsi, Lohsoonthorn, & Lertmaharit, ). A broad range of nursing and midwifery interventions and programs represented community settings and hospitals in rural and metropolitan locations.…”

“…The MRC framework (Moore et al., ) was found to be useful in clarifying causal mechanisms and identifying the factors associated with variations in outcomes (Furness et al., ). Similarly, the PARIHS framework (Rycroft‐Malone, ) provided insight into factors contributing to variations in outcomes across multiple sites (Hill et al., ). Frameworks developed for specific programs were useful to highlight the benefits of a program (Dickerson et al., ) and to explain causes for different outcomes (Sockolow, ; Yonge et al., ).…”

“…The MRC (Moore et al., ) framework was a useful tool for understanding the process of implementing an intervention (Furness et al., ). The PARIHS (Rycroft‐Malone, ) framework allowed users to identify critical insights that influenced implementation of an initiative across sites and also helped evaluators to develop strategies to promote greater integration and behaviour change (Hill et al., ). The PARIHS (Moore et al., ) framework promoted consideration of a broader range of factors influencing the uptake of the intervention including resources, stakeholder commitment and community involvement (Bergstrom et al., ).…”

“…Similarly, the PARIHS framework (Rycroft-Malone, 2004) provided insight into factors contributing to variations in outcomes across multiple sites (Hill et al, 2017). Frameworks developed for specific programs were useful to highlight the benefits of a program (Dickerson et al, 2014) and to explain causes for different outcomes (Sockolow, 2009;Yonge et al, 2011).…”

“…For example, a health centre in Ghana providing midwifery services found the use of an evaluation framework helpful in identifying the contextual influences on knowledge transfer (Bergstrom, Peterson, Namusoko, Waiswa, & Wallin, 2012). The same framework was applied in the USA, in relation to research with spinal cord injury veterans, to promote integration of evidence into clinical practice (Hill et al, 2017).…”