Dimensions of Quality &    Implementation Outcomes Defined

The following interactive visual provides definitions of the dimensions of health service quality outlined in the Alberta Quality Matrix for Health and Enola Proctor’s recommended list of implementation outcomes.    Both frameworks have been adapted to fit the current Alberta context using the updated British Columbia Health Quality Matrix, Alberta Health Services Innovation Pipeline, and the RE-AIM evaluation framework.    Hover your cursor over an outcome to reveal its definition. 

1, 2

Ease with which health and wellness services are reached

Accessibility

ACCESSIBILITY

Optimal and sustainable use of resources to yield maximum value

Efficiency

EFFICIENCY

Care that is known to achieve intended outcomes

Effectiveness

EFFECTIVENESS

Fair distribution of services according to population need

Equity

EQUITY

Quality - Honouring a person's choices, needs and values

Implementation -Satisfaction with what is being

implemented

Acceptability

ACCEPTABILITY

Quality - Care that is relevant to a patient's needs;

Implementation - Compatibility of what is being implemented

Appropriateness

APPROPRIATENESS

Resources and costs required to implement an intervention

Implementation Cost

IMPLEMENTATION   COST

Extent to which the intervention is maintained or institutionalized

Sustainability

SUSTAINABILITY

Practicality of what is being implemented

Feasibility

FEASIBILITY

Willingness to participate in an intervention

Reach

REACH

Degree to which an intervention was used or implemented as intended

Fidelity

FIDELITY

Intention or attempt to use or implement an intervention

Adoption/   Uptake

ADOPTION/ UPTAKE

Avoiding harm and fostering security

Safety

SAFETY

Dimensions of Quality & Implementation Outcomes

 

Perspectives to consider in an evaluation

The tool outlines several perspectives to consider in an evaluation: patients, healthcare providers, support teams, and organizations. These perspectives take into account the various roles involved in implementation as well as the broader context. They are based on the Interactive Systems Framework and Alberta Health Services Quadruple Aim.     Hover your cursor over a perspective to reveal its definition. 

9, 10

Perspectives Defined

PATIENTS

Individuals with personal experience of a health issues and/or caregivers, family members and friends

HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS

Those responsible for delivering healthcare services

HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS

SUPPORT

Intermediaries responsible for supporting healthcare providers and driving innovation

SUPPORT

ORGANIZATIONS

The system that healthcare services are delivered in

ORGANIZATIONS

 
 
 
 
 

References

1. Health Quality Council of Alberta [Website]. The Alberta Quality Matrix for Health [cited 2020 Dec 17]. Available from: https://www.hqca.ca/about/how-we-work/the-alberta-quality-matrix-forhealth-1/

2. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health (2011) 38:65-76. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10488-010-0319-7 doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7

3. RE-AIM [Website]. REACH [cited 2020 Dec 17]. Available from: https://www.re-aim.org/about/what-is-re-aim/reach/

4. BC Patient Safety & Quality Council [Website]. BC Health Quality Matrix [cited 2020 Dec 17]. Available from: https://bcpsqc.ca/resource/bc-health-quality-matrix/

5. Waye A, Hughes B, Mrklas K, Fraser N. Innovation Pipeline: Intent to Scale for Impact. Alberta Health Services; 2020. Available from: https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/assets/about/scn/ahs-scn-so-innov-pipeline-primer.pdf

 

6. Mettert K, Lewis C, Dorsey C, Halko H, Weiner B. Measuring implementation outcomes: An updated systematic review of measures’ psychometric properties. Implementation Research and Practice (2020) 1:1-29. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2633489520936644 doi: 10.1177/2633489520936644

7. Khadjesari Z, Boufked S, Vitoratou S, Schatte L, Ziemann A, Daskalopoulou C, et al. Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review. Implement Sci (2020) 15:66. Available from: https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13012-020-01027-6 doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01027-6

 

8. Willmeroth T, Wesselborg B, Kuske S. Implementation Outcomes and Indicators as a New Challenge in Health Services Research: A Systematic Scoping Review. Inquiry (2019) 56:1-17. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0046958019861257 doi: 10.1177/0046958019861257


9. Wandersman A, Duffy J, Flaspohler P, Noonan R, Lubell K, Stillman L, et al. Bridging the Gap Between Prevention Research and Practice: The Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation. Am J Community Psychol (2008) 41:171–181. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1007/s10464-008-9174-z doi: 10.1007/s10464-008-9174-z

10. Alberta Health Services. Enhancing Care in the Community [cited 2021 Mar 19]. Available from: https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/about/Page13457.aspx