Making sense of primary care practices' capacity for change

David Litaker, Mary Ruhe, Sue Flocke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A deeper understanding of the forces that shape the motivation and willingness of primary care practices to adopt and implement new procedures-their "capacity for change"-may better guide development of interventions to foster adoption and implementation of evidence-based care. This study applies and evaluates the utility of a previously described framework for making sense of this complex construct in a diverse sample of primary care practices. A multidisciplinary team of 3 analysts examined ethnographic field notes that describe 15 single-physician or multiphysician practices in different organizational settings. Examples of the 4 components within the framework (ie, staff motivations, resources, opportunities for change, and external influences) and their interactions were identified. Cross-practice comparisons identified emerging themes relevant to capacity for change. Not surprisingly, variation among examples of individual components of change capacity across practices was present. Patterns among these components, however, seemed less informative in making sense of practices' capacity for change than patterns across component interactions. For example, the ability of practice members to recognize and act on opportunities for change seemed to be shaped by the extent to which motivations were broadly shared within the practice and by tangible and intangible resources (eg, leadership style, relationships among practice members, and financial resources of the practice). Revised operational definitions for framework components and careful reflection on the nature of their interactions helped make sense of practices' capacity for change in our sample and will enable future hypothesis testing to refine our understanding of factors that influence the translation of scientific knowledge in primary care settings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)245-253
Number of pages9
JournalTranslational Research
Volume152
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Motivation
Primary Health Care
Aptitude
Translational Medical Research
Physicians
Testing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Biochemistry, medical
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Making sense of primary care practices' capacity for change. / Litaker, David; Ruhe, Mary; Flocke, Sue.

In: Translational Research, Vol. 152, No. 5, 01.01.2008, p. 245-253.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Litaker, David ; Ruhe, Mary ; Flocke, Sue. / Making sense of primary care practices' capacity for change. In: Translational Research. 2008 ; Vol. 152, No. 5. pp. 245-253.
@article{834241f405a74f15873bb7776c5c35cf,
title = "Making sense of primary care practices' capacity for change",
abstract = "A deeper understanding of the forces that shape the motivation and willingness of primary care practices to adopt and implement new procedures-their {"}capacity for change{"}-may better guide development of interventions to foster adoption and implementation of evidence-based care. This study applies and evaluates the utility of a previously described framework for making sense of this complex construct in a diverse sample of primary care practices. A multidisciplinary team of 3 analysts examined ethnographic field notes that describe 15 single-physician or multiphysician practices in different organizational settings. Examples of the 4 components within the framework (ie, staff motivations, resources, opportunities for change, and external influences) and their interactions were identified. Cross-practice comparisons identified emerging themes relevant to capacity for change. Not surprisingly, variation among examples of individual components of change capacity across practices was present. Patterns among these components, however, seemed less informative in making sense of practices' capacity for change than patterns across component interactions. For example, the ability of practice members to recognize and act on opportunities for change seemed to be shaped by the extent to which motivations were broadly shared within the practice and by tangible and intangible resources (eg, leadership style, relationships among practice members, and financial resources of the practice). Revised operational definitions for framework components and careful reflection on the nature of their interactions helped make sense of practices' capacity for change in our sample and will enable future hypothesis testing to refine our understanding of factors that influence the translation of scientific knowledge in primary care settings.",
author = "David Litaker and Mary Ruhe and Sue Flocke",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.trsl.2008.09.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "152",
pages = "245--253",
journal = "Translational Research",
issn = "1931-5244",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Making sense of primary care practices' capacity for change

AU - Litaker, David

AU - Ruhe, Mary

AU - Flocke, Sue

PY - 2008/1/1

Y1 - 2008/1/1

N2 - A deeper understanding of the forces that shape the motivation and willingness of primary care practices to adopt and implement new procedures-their "capacity for change"-may better guide development of interventions to foster adoption and implementation of evidence-based care. This study applies and evaluates the utility of a previously described framework for making sense of this complex construct in a diverse sample of primary care practices. A multidisciplinary team of 3 analysts examined ethnographic field notes that describe 15 single-physician or multiphysician practices in different organizational settings. Examples of the 4 components within the framework (ie, staff motivations, resources, opportunities for change, and external influences) and their interactions were identified. Cross-practice comparisons identified emerging themes relevant to capacity for change. Not surprisingly, variation among examples of individual components of change capacity across practices was present. Patterns among these components, however, seemed less informative in making sense of practices' capacity for change than patterns across component interactions. For example, the ability of practice members to recognize and act on opportunities for change seemed to be shaped by the extent to which motivations were broadly shared within the practice and by tangible and intangible resources (eg, leadership style, relationships among practice members, and financial resources of the practice). Revised operational definitions for framework components and careful reflection on the nature of their interactions helped make sense of practices' capacity for change in our sample and will enable future hypothesis testing to refine our understanding of factors that influence the translation of scientific knowledge in primary care settings.

AB - A deeper understanding of the forces that shape the motivation and willingness of primary care practices to adopt and implement new procedures-their "capacity for change"-may better guide development of interventions to foster adoption and implementation of evidence-based care. This study applies and evaluates the utility of a previously described framework for making sense of this complex construct in a diverse sample of primary care practices. A multidisciplinary team of 3 analysts examined ethnographic field notes that describe 15 single-physician or multiphysician practices in different organizational settings. Examples of the 4 components within the framework (ie, staff motivations, resources, opportunities for change, and external influences) and their interactions were identified. Cross-practice comparisons identified emerging themes relevant to capacity for change. Not surprisingly, variation among examples of individual components of change capacity across practices was present. Patterns among these components, however, seemed less informative in making sense of practices' capacity for change than patterns across component interactions. For example, the ability of practice members to recognize and act on opportunities for change seemed to be shaped by the extent to which motivations were broadly shared within the practice and by tangible and intangible resources (eg, leadership style, relationships among practice members, and financial resources of the practice). Revised operational definitions for framework components and careful reflection on the nature of their interactions helped make sense of practices' capacity for change in our sample and will enable future hypothesis testing to refine our understanding of factors that influence the translation of scientific knowledge in primary care settings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=57649106563&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=57649106563&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.trsl.2008.09.005

DO - 10.1016/j.trsl.2008.09.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 19010296

AN - SCOPUS:57649106563

VL - 152

SP - 245

EP - 253

JO - Translational Research

JF - Translational Research

SN - 1931-5244

IS - 5

ER -