Facilitators and barriers in the implementation of the meeting centres model for people with dementia and their carers
Introduction
Research showing that an innovation is effective and the people involved are satisfied with it, does not automatically imply its large-scale implementation. That takes more than writing about positive research results. The innovation will have to be implemented. Some innovations benefit from adaptive implementation [1], which takes into account the local situation, to which the innovation is tuned and, if necessary, adapted. Which are the most effective strategies in the implementation of innovations is not always or immediately clear [2], [3], [4]. Various systematic literature reviews show that the strategies that are proven effective in one study are not necessarily proven effective in another. Furthermore, the effectiveness of strategies turns out to depend on the type of innovation and the phase in the implementation process. Multiple (multi-faceted) strategies that take into account facilitators and barriers in implementation, are expected to be the most effective strategies [2], [5]. Gaining insight into facilitating and impeding factors in implementation is therefore considered an important step in the process of effective implementation.
In the study that is reported on in this article, we traced facilitating and impeding factors in the adaptive implementation of the meeting centres programme to support people with dementia and their carers. This support programme was developed in 1992–1994 [6] and it was proven effective in a controlled study in 1994–1996 [7]. The present study was part of an extensive multi-centre study into the preconditions of successful implementation of meeting centres in The Netherlands [8]. To guide the data collection and analyses, a theoretical search model was developed [9] on the basis of a survey of the literature, previous experiences with setting up meeting centres and information from experts that were consulted (see Fig. 1). With this model, we investigated which characteristics of the innovation and other preconditions either facilitated or impeded the implementation of the meeting centres, and which factors at the micro, meso and macro levels of the successive phases of the implementation process had facilitated or impeded the implementation. The results will be used to compile an implementation guide to facilitate the nationwide implementation of meeting centres and its evaluation.
Section snippets
Setting
The study was conducted in the period March 2000 to March 2003 in 13 meeting centres, located in five regions in The Netherlands. Five meeting centres were already operational at the start of the study, five centres started during the study, and three centres had been discontinued at the start of the study. The meeting centres were located mainly in community centres and centres for the elderly; other meeting centres were located in a church annex, a converted old people's flat, and in a
Characteristics of the innovation
An obvious surplus value as compared to the local support offer clearly facilitated the implementation of meeting centres. For example, the meeting centre is an addition to the care provision because it focuses on people with mild to moderately severe dementia who live at home as well as their carers. Some type of support was frequently present in a region, but the combination of the fragmented support offer for this target group was considered an improvement by key figures from home care,
Conclusion and discussion
In our study of facilitating and impeding factors in the adaptive implementation of meeting centres, we used a theoretical model [9], developed specifically for this purpose, to guide the data collection and analyses. The model distinguishes different phases of implementation, and for each phase the facilitators and barriers were investigated on the micro, meso and macro levels. In addition, characteristics of the innovation and other preconditions were examined for their facilitating and
Acknowledgments
The study received financial support from ZonMw (Dutch Health Research and Development Council), the Valerius Foundation, Association for Support of Christian Care of people with Mental and Nervous Diseases, Novartis, National Fund Elderly Support, Foundation Sluyterman Van Loo, VSB-fund, the Provinces of Groningen, Utrecht and Gelderland. The authors wish to thank all the personnel and participants of the meeting centres programme and the responsible organizations for their cooperation.
References (32)
- et al.
Evidence-based implementation of evidence based medicine
The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement
(1999) - et al.
Development of a theoretical model for tracing facilitators and barriers in adaptive implementation of innovative practices in dementia care
Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics
(2004) - et al.
Possibilities and barriers in the implementation of a preconceptional screening programme for cystic fibrosis carriers: a focus group study
Public Health
(2003) - et al.
From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care
The Lancet
(2003) - et al.
Implementatie: het invoeren van vernieuwingen in de ouderenzorg
Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice
British Medical Journal
(1997)- NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Getting evidence into practice. Effective Health Care...
- et al.
Methods for identifying barriers and facilitators for implementation
Changing professional practice. Theory and practice of clinical guidelines implementation
(1999) - et al.
Amsterdamse Ontmoetingscentra; een nieuwe vorm van ondersteuning voor dementerende ouderen en hun verzorgers Eindrapport voorstudie. [Amsterdam meeting centres; a new type of support for elderly people with dementia and their caregivers – final report preliminary study]
(1994) Amsterdamse Ontmoetingscentra – een nieuwe vorm van ondersteuning voor dementerende mensen en hun verzorgers. Eindrappport effectstudie [Amsterdam meeting centres; a new type of support for elderly people with dementia and their caregivers – final report outcome study]
(1996)