@article{JTD26537,
author = {Anne C. Lambert-Kerzner and Davis M. Aasen and Douglas M. Overbey and Laura J. Damschroder and William G. Henderson and Karl E. Hammermeister and Michael R. Bronsert and Robert A. Meguid},
title = {Use of the consolidated framework for implementation research to guide dissemination and implementation of new technologies in surgery},
journal = {Journal of Thoracic Disease},
volume = {11},
number = {Suppl 4},
year = {2019},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: Improving surgical outcomes is important to patients, providers, and healthcare systems. Understanding best methods to ensure evidence based practices are successfully implemented and sustained in clinical practices leads to improved care. Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science facilitates the successful pathway from clinical trials to sustained implementation.
Methods: We describe D&I science, introduce the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR), a D&I framework, and provide an example of how CFIR was utilized to facilitate the translational process from design adaptations to implementation, broad utilization by clinicians, and sustainability of the SUrgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) tool into regular clinical practice. SURPAS creates data-driven individualized risk assessments of common adverse postoperative outcomes to enhance the informed consent process, shared decision making, and consequently improved surgical outcomes. The CFIR provided a structured systematic way to identify constructs influencing the D&I of SURPAS, including adaptations for the process and tool.
Results: We identified three domains, each with specific constructs, that participants believed would strongly influence effectiveness of SURPAS implementation efforts: the importance of patients’ perspectives (outer setting); the quality of SURPAS (intervention characteristic); and integration of SURPAS into the electronic health record (inner setting). Additionally, providers’ positive attitudes toward and support of SURPAS (characteristics of individuals); and the ease of integration of SURPAS into the workflow (process), were also identified. Tension emerged between patients’ preference of the provision of risk information and providers’ concern about additional clinic time required for formal risk discussion with low-risk patients.
Conclusions: Systematically identifying constructs from the beginning of the design through the implementation process can guide design of a multi-component strategy for future large-scale implementation by assessing the relative impact of factors on implementation using the CFIR framework. In the example studied, this allows key stakeholders to ensure success of D&I of SURPAS at multiple levels and times, continuously optimizing the process.},
issn = {2077-6624}, url = {https://jtd.amegroups.org/article/view/26537}
}