Skip to main content

Table 5 Joint display capacity

From: A mixed methods multiple case study to evaluate the implementation of a care pathway for colorectal cancer surgery using extended normalization process theory

Capacity: Social-structural resources available to agents (Social roles, Social norms, Material & Cognitive resources)
  AR
(IR)
SrA ↑↓ LOS (ΔLOS) Qualitative data
Hospital 1 75%
(10%)
88% ↑17
↓5
(6.0d)
(−3.1d)
• Resources available, including time and data system
• No support from quality department, but trained CP facilitator supported project
• Clear clinical leader
• Improvement team had no experience in CP methodology, project as opportunity to learn each other’s contribution
Hospital 2 65%
(22%)
60% ↑18
↓3
8.2d
(−4.2d)
• Resources and time constraints. Comprehensive data system available, but manual retrieval of data
• Improvement team had experience with developing and implementing CPs, a detailed project plan was used, quality department supported the project
• Medical champion present, but new in hospital, perceived as disadvantage in collaboration with surgeons
Hospital 8 47%
(−13%)
71% ↑6
↓9
10.3d
(−4.4d)
• No resources and no time, no data system available
• No clear local champion
• Day-to-day teamwork perceived as good
Hospital 9 54%
(−3%)
72% ↑13
↓6
10.2d
(2.1d)
• No resources nor time for improvement activities, no data system available.
• No improvement team formed, and no clear clinical leader
• Limited support from quality department
• Day-to-day teamwork perceived as challenging
Hospital 10 64%
(−5%)
64% ↑7
↓8
18.8d
(1.8d)
• Lack of resources and time, staff shortage, limited data available in data system
• Both medical and nursing champions, but medical champion only working on 1 of 2 wards
• Improvement team had no experience in CP methodology, champion had experience
  1. AR Adherence rate post-test, IR Improvement rate, SrA Self-rated adherence, ↑↓ number of interventions on which adherence went up or down, LOS length of stay post-test, ∆LOS change in mean LOS (days)