Leader perspectives on implementing Time Together: a qualitative process evaluation using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
Andreas Glantz, Britt-Marie Lindgren, Ingeborg Nilsson, Anna Westerlund, Ulla Hällgren Graneheim, Jenny MolinObjectives
Time Together (TT) is a nursing intervention designed with a focus on increasing the possibility of patients and staff engaging in joint activities. Previous research points towards implementation difficulties but there are no studies specifically investigating the process of implementing TT in psychiatric inpatient care (PIC). Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore mid-level leaders’ and implementation leads’ perspectives on implementing TT in PIC, analysed through the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
Design
This qualitative study used semistructured interviews with 11 mid-level leaders and implementation leads who took part in implementing TT. The interviews were analysed using deductive qualitative content analysis, with the CFIR applied as a structured matrix in the analysis.
Setting
The study was conducted in PIC settings at three wards within secondary care healthcare services in northern Sweden.
Participants
Participants were 11 mid-level leaders and implementation leads involved in the implementation of TT in PIC.
Interventions
TT is scheduled for 1 hour, 5 days a week. During this hour, nursing staff and patients engage in joint activities, while one or two staff members oversee administrative duties. No meetings, visits or other ward-related activities are scheduled during this hour.
Results
Deductive content analysis resulted in 15 categories sorted into 4 domains and 11 constructs. TT was perceived as advantageous and aligned with the wards’ mission. However, one key finding was that mid-level leaders and implementation leads found implementation challenging as they perceived that some innovation deliverers viewed joint activities within TT as lacking value and not being ‘proper work’. Furthermore, there was a need for more information and a clearer rationale for the intervention in order to improve implementation and delivery.
Conclusions
The findings indicate a discrepancy in values and attitudes between leaders and innovation deliverers regarding what constitutes meaningful care in psychiatric inpatient settings. Implementation was further influenced by challenges related to leadership and motivating others. Barriers to implementing TT may not be addressable through implementation and intervention training alone. Instead, implementation planning should also consider intervention deliverers’ values and beliefs.