English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background  In 2013, Health Quality Ontario introduced stroke quality-based procedures (QBPs) to promote use of evidence-based practices for patients with stroke in Ontario hospitals. The study purpose was to: (a) describe the knowledge translation (KT) interventions used to support stroke QBP implementation, (b) assess differences in the planned and reported KT interventions by region, and (c) explore determinants perceived to have affected outcomes.    Methods  A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate: activities, KT interventions, and determinants of stroke QBP implementation. In Phase 1, a document review of regional stroke network work plans was conducted to capture the types of KT activities planned at a  regional  level; these were mapped to the knowledge to action framework. In Phase 2, we surveyed Ontario hospital staff to identify the KT interventions used to support QBP implementation at a n organizational  level. Phase 3 involved qualitative interviews with staff to elucidate deeper understanding of survey findings.    Results  Of the 446 activities identified in the document review, the most common were ‘dissemination’ (24.2%;  n  = 108), ‘implementation’ (22.6%;  n  = 101), ‘implementation planning’ (15.0%;  n  = 67), and ‘knowledge tools’ (10.5%;  n  = 47). Based on survey data ( n  = 489), commonly reported KT interventions included: staff educational meetings (43.1%;  n  = 154), champions (41.5%;  n  = 148), and staff educational materials (40.6%;  n  = 145). Survey participants perceived stroke QBP implementation to be successful (median = 5/7; interquartile range = 4–6; range = 1–7;  n  = 335). Forty-four people (e.g., managers, senior leaders, regional stroke network representatives, and frontline staff) participated in interviews/focus groups. Perceived facilitators to QBP implementation included networks and collaborations with external organizations, leadership engagement, and hospital prioritization of stroke QBP. Perceived barriers included lack of funding, size of the hospital (i.e., too small), lack of resources (i.e., staff and time), and simultaneous implementation of other QBPs.    Conclusions  Information on the types of activities and KT interventions used to support stroke QBP implementation and the key determinants influencing uptake of stroke QBPs can be used to inform future activities including the development and evaluation of interventions to address barriers and leverage facilitators.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3220-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

bmc health services research

Supporting the implementation of stroke quality-based procedures (QBPs): a mixed methods evaluation to identify knowledge translation activities, knowledge translation interventions, and determinants of implementation across Ontario