Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 May-Jun;30(3):337-349.
doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2017.03.160151.

Factors Related to Implementation and Reach of a Pragmatic Multisite Trial: The My Own Health Report (MOHR) Study

Bijal A Balasubramanian  1 , Suzanne Heurtin-Roberts  2 , Sarah Krasny  2 , Catherine L Rohweder  2 , Kayla Fair  2 , Tanya T Olmos-Ochoa  2 , Kurt C Stange  2 , Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin  2 ; MOHR Study Group
Affiliations

Factors Related to Implementation and Reach of a Pragmatic Multisite Trial: The My Own Health Report (MOHR) Study

Bijal A Balasubramanian et al. J Am Board Fam Med. 2017 May-Jun.

Abstract

Background: Contextual factors relevant to translating healthcare improvement interventions to different settings are rarely collected systematically. This study articulates a prospective method for assessing and describing contextual factors related to implementation and patient reach of a pragmatic trial in primary care.

Methods: In a qualitative case-series, contextual factors were assessed from the My Own Health Report (MOHR) study, focused on systematic health risk assessments and goal setting for unhealthy behaviors and behavioral health in nine primary care practices. Practice staff interviews and observations, guided by a context template were conducted prospectively at three time points. Patient reach was calculated as percentage of patients completing MOHR of those who were offered MOHR and themes describing contextual factors were summarized through an iterative, data immersion process.These included practice members' motivations towards MOHR, practice staff capacity for implementation, practice information system capacity, external resources to support quality improvement, community linkages, and implementation strategy fit with patient populations.

Conclusions: Systematically assessing contextual factors prospectively throughout implementation of quality improvement initiatives helps translation to other health care settings. Knowledge of contextual factors is essential for scaling up of effective interventions.

Keywords: Delivery of Health Care; Health Resources; Patient Care Team; Primary Health Care; Quality Improvement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: none declared.

References

    1. Kaplan HC, Provost LP, Froehle CM, Margolis PA. The Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ): building a theory of context in healthcare quality improvement. BMJ quality & safety. 2012;21(1):13–20. - PubMed
    1. Stange KC, Glasgow RE. Considering and reporting important contextual factors in research on the patient-centered medical home. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013.
    1. Badger F, Plumridge G, Hewison A, Shaw KL, Thomas K, Clifford C. An evaluation of the impact of the Gold Standards Framework on collaboration in end-of-life care in nursing homes. A qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(5):586–595. - PubMed
    1. Chaney EF, Rubenstein LV, Liu CF, et al. Implementing collaborative care for depression treatment in primary care: a cluster randomized evaluation of a quality improvement practice redesign. Implement Sci. 2011;6:121. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Macq J, Solis A, Martinez G, Martiny P. Tackling tuberculosis patients' internalized social stigma through patient centred care: an intervention study in rural Nicaragua. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:154. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms