Logo image
Back
Establishing the Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention in Queensland emergency departments: a qualitative implementation study using the i-PARIHS model
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Establishing the Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention in Queensland emergency departments: a qualitative implementation study using the i-PARIHS model

Marianne Wallis, Alison Craswell, Elizabeth Marsden and Andrea Taylor
BMC Health Services Research, Vol.22(1), 692
2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08081-4
PMID: 35606808
pdf
Establishing the Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention in Queensland emergency departments: a qualitative implementation study using the i-PARIHS model1.16 MBDownloadView
Published (Version of record)CC BY V4.0,  Open Access
url
Establishing the Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention in Queensland emergency departments: a qualitative implementation study using the i-PARIHS modelView
Published (Version of record)CC BY-NC V4.0,  Open

Related links

Metrics

6 File views/ downloads
67 Record Views
5 Times Cited - Web of Science

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

Source: InCites

Abstract

Geriatric Emergency medical services Implementation science Hospital Delivery of health care Acute care Implementation science and evaluation Urgent and critical care, and emergency medicine
Background: Frail older adults require specific, targeted care and expedited shared decision making in the emergency department (ED) to prevent poor outcomes and minimise time spent in this chaotic environment. The Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention (GEDI) model was developed to help limit these undesirable consequences. This qualitative study aimed to explore the ways in which two hospital implementation sites implemented the structures and processes of the GEDI model and to examine the ways in which the i-PARIHS (innovation-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) framework influenced the implementation. Methods: Using the i-PARIHS approach to implementation, the GEDI model was disseminated into two hospitals using a detailed implementation toolkit, external and internal facilitators and a structured program of support. Following implementation, interviews were conducted with a range of staf involved in the implementation at both sites to explore the implementation process used. Transcribed interviews were analysed for themes and sub-themes. Results: There were 31 interviews with clinicians involved in the implementation, conducted across two hospitals, including interviews with the two external facilitators. Major themes identified included: (i) elements of the GEDI model adopted or (ii) adapted by implementation sites and (iii) factors that affected the implementation of the GEDI model. Both sites adopted the model of care and there was general support for the GEDI approach to the management of frail older people in the ED. Both sites adapted the structure of the GEDI team and the expertise of the team members to suit their needs and resources. Elements such as service focus, funding, staff development and service evaluation were initially adopted but adaptation occurred over time. Resourcing and cost shifting issues at the implementation sites and at the site providing the external facilitators negatively impacted the facilitation process. Conclusions: The i-PARIHS framework provided a pragmatic approach to the implementation of the evidenced based GEDI model. Passionate, driven clinicians ensured that successful implementation occurred despite unanticipated changes in context at both the implementation and host facilitator sites as well as the absence of sustained facilitation support.

Details

Logo image