↓ Skip to main content

Factors influencing the long-term sustainment of quality improvements made in addiction treatment facilities: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Factors influencing the long-term sustainment of quality improvements made in addiction treatment facilities: a qualitative study
Published in
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13722-017-0093-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott P. Stumbo, James H. Ford, Carla A. Green

Abstract

A greater understanding of the factors that influence long-term sustainment of quality improvement (QI) initiatives is needed to promote organizational ability to sustain QI practices over time, help improve future interventions, and increase the value of QI investments. We approached 83 of 201 executive sponsors or change leaders at addiction treatment organizations that participated in the 2007-2009 NIATx200 QI intervention. We completed semi-structured interviews with 33 individuals between November 2015 and April 2016. NIATx200 goals were to decrease wait time, increase admissions and improve retention in treatment. Interviews sought to understand factors that either facilitated or impeded long-term sustainment of organizational QI practices made during the intervention. We used thematic analysis to organize the data and group patterns of responses. We assessed available quantitative outcome data and intervention engagement data to corroborate qualitative results. We used narrative analysis to group four important themes related to long-term sustainment of QI practices: (1) finding alignment between business- and client-centered practices; (2) staff engagement early in QI process added legitimacy which facilitated sustainment; (3) commitment to integrating data into monitoring practices and the identification of a data champion; and (4) adequate organizational human resources devoted to sustainment. We found four corollary factors among agencies which did not sustain practices: (1) lack of evidence of impact on business practices led to discontinuation; (2) disengaged staff and lack of organizational capacity during implementation period led to lack of sustainment; (3) no data integration into overall business practices and no identified data champion; and (4) high staff turnover. In addition, we found that many agencies' current use of NIATx methods and tools suggested a legacy effect that might improve quality elsewhere, even absent overall sustainment of original study outcome goals. Available quantitative data on wait-time reduction demonstrated general concordance between agency perceptions of, and evidence for, sustainment 2 years following the end of the intervention. Additional quantitative data suggested that greater engagement during the intervention period showed some association with sustainment. Factors identified in QI frameworks as important for short-term sustainment-organizational capacity (e.g. staffing and leadership) and intervention characteristics (e.g. flexibility and fit)-are also important to long-term sustainment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 18%
Social Sciences 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Engineering 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 14 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,305,383
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#232
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,479
of 340,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.