The influence of contextual factors on healthcare quality improvement initiatives: what works, for whom and in what setting? Protocol for a realist review

Citation

Coles E, Wells M, Maxwell M, Harris FM, Anderson J, Gray NM, Milner G & MacGillivray S (2017) The influence of contextual factors on healthcare quality improvement initiatives: what works, for whom and in what setting? Protocol for a realist review. Systematic Reviews, 6 (1), Art. No.: 168. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0566-8

Abstract
Background  Context shapes the effectiveness of knowledge implementation and influences health improvement. Successful healthcare quality improvement (QI) initiatives frequently fail to transfer to different settings, with local contextual factors often cited as the cause. Understanding and overcoming contextual barriers is therefore crucial to implementing effective improvement; yet context is still poorly understood. There is a paucity of information on the mechanisms underlyinghowandwhyQI projects succeed or fail in given settings. A realist review of empirical studies of healthcare QI initiatives will be undertaken to examine the influence and impact of contextual factors on quality improvement in healthcare settings and explore whether QI initiatives can work in all contexts.  Methods  The review will explore which contextual factors are important, and how, why, when and for whom they are important, within varied settings. The dynamic nature of context and change over time will be explored by examining which aspects of context impact at key points in the improvement trajectory. The review will also consider the influence of context on improvement outcomes (provider- and patient-level), spread and sustainability. The review process will follow five iterative steps: (1) clarify scope, (2) search for evidence, (3) appraise primary studies and extract data, (4) synthesise evidence and draw conclusions and (5) disseminate findings. The reviewers will consult with experts and stakeholders in the early stages to focus the review and develop a programme theory consisting of explanatory ‘context–mechanism–outcome’ configurations. Searches for primary evidence will be conducted iteratively. Data will be extracted and tested against the programme theory. A review advisory group will oversee the review process. Review findings will follow RAMESES guidelines and will be disseminated via a report, presentations and peer-reviewed publications.  Discussion  The review will update and consolidate evidence on the contextual conditions for effective improvement and distil new knowledge to inform the design and development of context-sensitive QI initiatives. This review ties in with the study of improvement programmes as vehicles of change and the development of an evidence base around healthcare improvement by addressing whether QI initiatives can work in all contexts.  Systematic review registration  PROSPERO CRD42017062135

Keywords
Realist review; Realist synthesis; Context; Quality improvement; Health improvement; Implementation; Healthcare; Evidence-based practice; Knowledge translation

Journal
Systematic Reviews: Volume 6, Issue 1

People

Professor Margaret Maxwell

Director of NMAHP Research Unit, NMAHP

Professor Mary Wells

Honorary Professor, NMAHP