The barriers and facilitators to the implementation of National Clinical Programmes in Ireland: using the MRC framework for process evaluations.

BACKGROUND: A major healthcare reform agenda in Ireland is underway which underpins the establishment of a series of National Clinical Programmes (NCPs), which aim to take an evidence based approach to improve quality, access and value. The current study aimed to determine the enablers and barriers to implementation of the NCPs. METHODS: A qualitative methodology advocated by the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework on conducting process evaluations of complex interventions guided this research. Purposive sampling techniques were used to recruit participants from seven NCPs across both acute and chronic healthcare domains, comprised of orthopaedics, rheumatology, elective surgery, emergency medicine, paediatrics, diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A total of 33 participants were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Participants included current and previous Clinical Leads, Programme Managers, Health Service Executive management, hospital Chief Executive Officers, representatives of General Practice, and a Nursing and a Patient representative. Thematic analyses was conducted. RESULTS: A range of factors of different combinations and co-occurrence were highlighted across a total of six themes, including (i) positive leadership, governance and clinical networks of the NCPs, (ii) the political and social context in which the NCPs operate, (iii) constraints on resources, (iv) a passive attitudinal resistance to change borne from poor consultation and communication, (v) lack of data and information technology, (vi) forces outside of the NCPs such as the general practitioner contract thwarting change of the model of care. CONCLUSIONS: The MRC framework proved a useful tool to conduct this process evaluation. Results from this research provide real world experiences and insight from the people charged with implementing large-scale health system improvement initiatives. The findings highlight the need for measured responses that acknowledge both direct and non-direct challenges and opportunities for successful change. Combined, it is recommended that these elements be considered in the planning and implementation of large-scale initiatives across healthcare delivery systems, both in Ireland and internationally.

Stand up, stand out. Feasibility of an active break targeting prolonged sitting in university students.

ObjectiveTo assess the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of an active break designed to disrupt prolonged sitting in university students. Participants: Students attending lectures in Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. Methods: Participants took part in an active break, which consisted of following a short exercise video lasting ∼4 min. They then completed a validated questionnaire consisting of 12 statements with two open-ended questions capturing likes/dislikes. Results: Overall 106 (response rate 96%) predominately female (83%, n = 87), health sciences students (91%, n = 96) participated. Percentage agreement ranged from 93.4% (n = 99) to 96.2% (n = 102) for acceptability, 84.9% (n = 90) to 93.4% (n = 99) for appropriateness, and 80.2% (n = 85) to 96.2% (n = 102) for feasibility. Space constraints and warm temperatures impacted negatively. Conclusion: An active break delivered during lectures is an acceptable and feasible intervention to disrupt sitting in students. Further investigation using a broader representation of the university population is needed prior to implementation.