External Policies & Incentives
From CFIR Wiki
|External Policies & Incentives|
A broad construct that includes external strategies to spread interventions including policy and regulations (governmental or other central entity), external mandates, recommendations and guidelines, pay-for-performance, collaboratives, and public or benchmark reporting.
Broad constructs that encompass external strategies to spread interventions, including policy and regulations (governmental or other central entity), external mandates, recommendations and guidelines, pay-for-performance, collaboratives, and public or benchmark reporting.
Rationale for inclusion
A broad construct that includes external strategies to spread interventions including policy and regulations (governmental or other central entity), external mandates, recommendations and guidelines, pay-forperformance, collaboratives, and public or benchmark reporting.
We combined political directives into intentional spread strategies because sometimes directives are incorporated into collaboratives or other spread strategies. Greenhalgh, et al describe “political directives” and include “policy ‘push’” and “external mandates” and cite evidence as strong (direct or indirect) in increasing motivation, though not capacity, of organizations to implement(page 610). Evidence for the influence of guidelines and public reporting is sparse and equivocal. The threat or reality of public reporting may also motivate organizations, especially late-adopters, to implement an intervention in an effort not to look bad compared to their competitors. However, public reporting can also have a negative influence if there is an adversarial relationship between the reporting entity and the target organization. In this context, people may cover-up (compliant implementation) or engage in “box-checking” rather than true committed use. Membership in a collaborative which adds a more active component to semi-public reporting and guidelines may foster successful implementation but formal quality improvement collaboratives have mixed effects. Typically, collaboratives provide the opportunity to benchmark against peers in conjunction with implementing new practices or products. Reimbursement systems and other incentives (usually monetary) that are controlled outside the organization are another external force that can influence implementation.
Qualitative codebook guidelines
Include descriptions of external performance measures from the system.
- “My supervisor was really motivated by reports of how well we were complying with the new practice from the collaborative.”
- “The local newspaper started reporting infection rates so leadership really started pushing to get our rates down.”
- “It’s an A1 recommendation so the Critical Care Committee said we needed to make the change.”
- "All leaders here care about is making their performance measures and there isn't one for this program."
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Mendel P, Meredith LS, Schoenbaum M, Sherbourne CD, Wells KB: Interventions in organizational and community context: a framework for building evidence on dissemination and implementation in health services research. Adm Policy Ment Health 2008, 35:21-37.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82:581-629.
- ↑ Klein KJ, Sorra JS: The Challenge of Innovation Implementation. The Academy of Management Review 1996, 21:1055-1080.
- ↑ Grol RP, Bosch MC, Hulscher ME, Eccles MP, Wensing M: Planning and studying improvement in patient care: the use of theoretical perspectives. Milbank Q 2007, 85:93-138.