scholarly journals Knowledge exchange systems for youth health and chronic disease prevention: a tri-provincial case study

2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 257-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
D Murnaghan ◽  
W Morrison ◽  
EJ Griffith ◽  
BL Bell ◽  
LA Duffley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Program Planning ◽  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Chronic Disease Prevention ◽  
Youth Health ◽  
Case Study Design

Introduction The research teams undertook a case study design using a common analytical framework to investigate three provincial (Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Manitoba) knowledge exchange systems. These three knowledge exchange systems seek to generate and enhance the use of evidence in policy development, program planning and evaluation to improve youth health and chronic disease prevention. Methods We applied a case study design to explore the lessons learned, that is, key conditions or processes contributing to the development of knowledge exchange capacity, using a multi-data collection method to gain an in-depth understanding. Data management, synthesis and analysis activities were concurrent, iterative and ongoing. The lessons learned were organized into seven "clusters". Results Key findings demonstrated that knowledge exchange is a complex process requiring champions, collaborative partnerships, regional readiness and the adaptation of knowledge exchange to diverse stakeholders. Discussion Overall, knowledge exchange systems can increase the capacity to exchange and use evidence by moving beyond collecting and reporting data. Areas of influence included development of new partnerships, expanded knowledge-sharing activities, and refinement of policy and practice approaches related to youth health and chronic disease prevention.

An intersectoral network for chronic disease prevention: the case of the Alberta Healthy Living Network

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 153-161
Author(s):  
R Geneau ◽  
B Legowski ◽  
S Stachenko
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Chronic Diseases ◽  
Causes Of Death ◽  
Qualitative Case Study ◽  
Chronic Disease Prevention ◽  
Policy Advocacy ◽  
Healthy Living

Chronic Diseases (CDs) are the leading causes of death and disability worldwide. CD experts have long promoted the use of integrated and intersectoral approaches to strengthen CD prevention efforts. This qualitative case study examined the perceived benefits and challenges associated with implementing an intersectoral network dedicated to CD prevention. Through interviewing key members of the Alberta Healthy Living Network (AHLN, or the Network), two overarching themes emerged from the data. The first relates to contrasting views on the role of the AHLN in relation to its actions and outcomes, especially concerning policy advocacy. The second focuses on the benefits and contributions of the AHLN and the challenge of demonstrating non-quantifiable outcomes. While the respondents agreed that the AHLN has contributed to intersectoral work in CD prevention in Alberta and to collaboration among Network members, several did not view this achievement as an end in itself and appealed to the Network to engage more in change-oriented activities. Managing contrasting expectations has had a significant impact on the functioning of the Network.

scholarly journals Building research capacity in chronic disease prevention in Mesoamerica: Progress and lessons learned

2014 ◽  
Vol 80 (3) ◽  
pp. 170
Author(s):  
A.G. Mejicano ◽  
M.P. Fort ◽  
M. Ramirez-Zea ◽  
C. Mendoza ◽  
H. Martinez
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Chronic Disease Prevention ◽  
Building Research

scholarly journals Lessons learned from inadequate implementation planning of team-based chronic disease management: implementation evaluation

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon L. Sibbald ◽  
Rachelle Van Asseldonk ◽  
Peiwen L. Cao ◽  
Benson Law
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Disease Management ◽  
Needs Assessment ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Chronic Disease Management ◽  
Program Planning ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract Background This study was a retrospective evaluation of an unsuccessfully implemented team-based, chronic disease management program, with an aim to understand more about implementation barriers. The program, the Chronic Disease Management Initiative (CDMI) was a new collaborative model of care for patients with COPD. It utilized customized health information and interactive tools, mainly smartphones, for ongoing disease management. The program’s goal was to demonstrate that integrated team-based models of care could improve patient care, as well as reduce readmission rates and emergency department visits. The program planning for CDMI began in 2017, followed by the implementation and evaluation period in 2018. After a 10-month implementation period, the program was unable to enroll a sufficient number of patients to examine if there was an improvement in patient outcomes. Methods A retrospective case-study design using multiple data sources was used to gather feedback from participants involved in CDMI. Data collection occurred throughout planning and implementation and continued into early 2019. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and transcripts were analyzed using NVivo 10 software. This was followed by content analysis. Results Analysis revealed four key themes as barriers to CDMI’s implementation: 1) lack of a needs assessment with key stakeholders; 2) lack of buy-in from medical staff; 3) inadequate patient engagement and; 4) contextual barriers. Planners did not conduct a proper needs assessment, nor include patients in the study design. In addition, there was insufficient consideration for how CDMI should be integrated into the usual COPD care plan, leading to confusion in roles and responsibilities. Poor communication between the implementation team and healthcare providers implementing the program, led to a lack of buy-in and engagement. Conclusion The key themes resonate with what is already known in the literature. This study supports the importance of using a theoretically grounded plan for implementation. Using a model only in the planning stages is insufficient even when an intervention is based on evidence to support higher quality care. It is imperative to consider practical and contextual factors of program implementation and their interactions. By detailing the ‘failed implementation’ of this intervention, we hope to share important lessons about the need to plan implementation processes early in program planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document