↓ Skip to main content

The barriers and facilitators to the implementation of National Clinical Programmes in Ireland: using the MRC framework for process evaluations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
39 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
The barriers and facilitators to the implementation of National Clinical Programmes in Ireland: using the MRC framework for process evaluations
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3543-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine D. Darker, Gail H. Nicolson, Aine Carroll, Joe M. Barry

Abstract

A major healthcare reform agenda in Ireland is underway which underpins the establishment of a series of National Clinical Programmes (NCPs), which aim to take an evidence based approach to improve quality, access and value. The current study aimed to determine the enablers and barriers to implementation of the NCPs. A qualitative methodology advocated by the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework on conducting process evaluations of complex interventions guided this research. Purposive sampling techniques were used to recruit participants from seven NCPs across both acute and chronic healthcare domains, comprised of orthopaedics, rheumatology, elective surgery, emergency medicine, paediatrics, diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A total of 33 participants were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Participants included current and previous Clinical Leads, Programme Managers, Health Service Executive management, hospital Chief Executive Officers, representatives of General Practice, and a Nursing and a Patient representative. Thematic analyses was conducted. A range of factors of different combinations and co-occurrence were highlighted across a total of six themes, including (i) positive leadership, governance and clinical networks of the NCPs, (ii) the political and social context in which the NCPs operate, (iii) constraints on resources, (iv) a passive attitudinal resistance to change borne from poor consultation and communication, (v) lack of data and information technology, (vi) forces outside of the NCPs such as the general practitioner contract thwarting change of the model of care. The MRC framework proved a useful tool to conduct this process evaluation. Results from this research provide real world experiences and insight from the people charged with implementing large-scale health system improvement initiatives. The findings highlight the need for measured responses that acknowledge both direct and non-direct challenges and opportunities for successful change. Combined, it is recommended that these elements be considered in the planning and implementation of large-scale initiatives across healthcare delivery systems, both in Ireland and internationally.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Lecturer 1 9%
Student > Postgraduate 1 9%
Librarian 1 9%
Researcher 1 9%
Other 5 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 3 27%
Unspecified 2 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 18%
Social Sciences 2 18%
Computer Science 1 9%
Other 1 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2019.
All research outputs
#505,374
of 13,477,663 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#139
of 4,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,832
of 266,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,477,663 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them