Open Journal of Philosophy 2013. Vol.3, No.4, 491-501 Published Online November 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojpp) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2013.34071 Open Access 491 Understanding the Implementation of a Complex Intervention Aiming to Change a Health Professional Role: A Conceptual Framework for Implementation Evaluation Sabina Abou-Malham1, Marie Hatem1, Nicole Leduc2 1Department of Social and Preventive Medicine , School of Public Heath, Université d e Montréal, Montreal, Canada 2Department of Health Admini stration, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada Email: sabina.abou.malham@umontreal.ca, marie.hatem@umontreal.ca, nicole.leduc@umontreal.ca Received August 5th, 2013; re vis ed Se ptember 5th, 2013; accepted September 12th, 2013 Copyright © 2013 Sabina Abou-Malham et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This paper proposes a conceptual framework for understanding the implementation process of a complex intervention concerned with professional role change. The proposed framework holds that the intervention must address three interacting systems (socio-cultural, educational and disciplinary) through which a health professional role evolves. Each system is operationalized by four dimensions (values, methods, ac- tors and targets). As for the implementation, the framework posits that it can be analyzed, by depicting the barriers and facilitators located within the dimensions of the three interacting systems and within the intervention involved in the process through using the “menu of constructs” approach suggested by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The implications of this framework, on theoretical research and practical levels, are reviewed. Keywords: Evaluation; Implementation; Framework; Change; Health Professional Role; Midwifery Introduction Professional role change has been the focus of many policy initiatives in a context of rising social pressures, new technolo- gies, higher demands of care and health needs. It has been con- sidered as a viable strategy to address health resource shortages, and to support the move from fragmented care provision to models that provide continuity of care and accessibility to op- timal health care (Laurant et al., 2010; McKenna, Keeney, & Hasson, 2009). Many types of changes in professional roles have been put forward such as enhancement, substitution, dele- gation, and introducing a ne w type of professional (Laurant et al., 2010; Sibbald, Shen, & McBride, 2004). Thus, enhancing roles and proliferation of new roles in many disciplines (e.g. nursing, midwifery) are occurring in health care systems throughout the world (Kislov, Nelson, de Normanville, Kelly, & Payne, 2012; McKenna et al., 2008). For instance, we are witnessing lately considerable growth in implementing initiatives for expanding professional roles such as nurse practitioner role and even cre- ating new roles such as consultant midwifery roles a cross many countries (UK, Australia, Quebec) (Sangster-Gormley, Martin- Misener, Downe-Wamboldt, & DiCenso, 2011). Professional role does not operate in a vacuum, but in systems that modulate this role (Dubois & Singh, 2009; Hatem- Asmar, Fraser, & Blais, 2002; Laurant et al., 2010). Thus, changing a health professional role refers to a complex process involving interdependent changes occurring within a variety of systems (Hatem-Asmar, 1997; Laurant et al., 2010; Nancarrow, Moran, Wiseman, Pighills, & Murphy, 2012). For instance, professional education has to be enhanced and training pro- grams have to be reviewed. With regard to society, public ac- ceptance of professional authority, and cultural credibility of the new role have to be gained and client support has to be mobilized. Concerning the organization of the profession, legal and regulatory actions, professional associations have to be adapted to accommodate role change (Hatem, 2008; Kronus, 1987; Laurant et al., 2010; Turner, 1990). Given that issues surrounding health professions are con- ceived as being fundamentally systemic in nature, this requires accordingly that interventions aiming to change a health pro- fessional role need to address the relevant systems. Neverthe- less, successful implementation of such interventions depends upon whether contextual conditions are favorable for change. Given the complexity of the implementation process, research- ers are called upon to conduct implementation focused-evalua- tion, measure the extent of real-time implementation and iden- tify potential influences of contextual factors on the progress of implementation efforts (Champagne, Brousselle, Hartz, Contan- driopoulos, & Denis, 2011; Damschroder et al., 2009). Therefore, understanding the implementation process re- quires a comprehensive evaluative framework adapted to the context in which the intervention is being introduced, and in our case the systems concerned with professional role change. Such framework helps to better understand the challenges that come into play for facilitating or impeding the implementation of change. The present paper argues and justifies the relevance of a comprehensive conceptual framework to analyze the imple-
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. mentation of a complex intervention aiming to change a health professional role. It is organized as follows: first, we begin by explaining how we conceptualize a health professional role change; we then, present implications of our conceptual think- ing for designing interventions aiming to change a health pro- fessional role. This is followed by presenting the relevance of using implementation focused-evaluation and by describing our proposed conceptual framework laying the two theoretical per- spectives that guided the development of the framework: 1) Hatem-Asmar conceptual model to identify the context in which the implementation takes place; 2) and the meta-theo- retical Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) of Damschroder et al. (2009) as an analytical tool for understanding implementation success or failure. Next, we illustrate the use of the framework through an example in the field of midwifery professional role; and lastly we discuss its implications in the domain of evaluation and the organization of professions. Conceptualizing a Health Professional Role Change We advance systems approach as a basis capable of support- ing health professional role change. Therefore, in this section, we will explore the following themes: 1) the role of systems approach in addressing the issues that affect a health profes- sional role change; 2) the nature of systems concerned with the professional role change; 3) a conceptual model for health pro- fessional role; and the 4) applicability of the model to mid- wifery role change. Role of Systems Approach in Addressing the Issues That Affect a Health Professional Role Change The concept of systems approach consists of comprehending the whole (system) instead of the parts. It concerns examining the linkages and interrelationships between the parts (subsys- tems) and the whole, and the relation of the whole with its con- text (Hargreaves, 2010; Parsons, 2007; Trochim, Cabrera, Milstein, Gallagher, & Leischow, 2006). Exploring the change process thru a systemic lens requires focusing on the interac- tions between system parts and with external environment as well as on coherence and alignment of the system’s compo- nents with the desired impact (Foster-Fishman, Nowell, & Yang, 2007; Supovitz & Taylor, 2005). Systems approach places emphasis on problem solving and can be seen as a sec- ond order change (Ison, Maiteny, & Carr, 1997) which requires attention to the underlying root causes of a problem and in- volves radical changes (Gash & Orlikowski, 1991). Shifting the focus from parts to wholes is a fundamental issue and this is why systems approaches appear so relevant to changing a health professional role. A systems approach moving away from silo thinking and analyzing the multiple facets of a health profession situation has been advocated by a number of sociologists. Freidson (1970) has emphasized that redesigning a formal curriculum of training and supporting the profession by licensure and legal exclusive right to work, will not assure its survival unless con- sidering “the profession service orientation which is a public imputation by which leaders have persuaded society to grant and support its autonomy” (Friedson, 1970: p. 82). According to the author, conditions which are causal in producing profes- sional autonomy are the societal, political, legal, educational and inter occupational which set the general limits of the work and grant an occupation the professional status of self-regula- tive autonomy. This is also echoed in Turner’s view (Turner, 1990) who suggests that conditions necessary to complete the change process involve a more generalized public acceptance of professional authority. Similarly, Kronus (1987) points out that conditions conducive to the successful expansion of role boundaries depend not only on the development of training facilities but upon mobilized client support and role’s credibil- ity among the society at large. To summarize briefly, a health professional role’s change is deeply grounded, not just in the education system, but within the current position of the profes- sion in the society at large and also as regards to the discipli- nary characteristics of the profession mainly its organization thru regulation which defines the scope of practice and also shapes inter-professional relationships. Nature of Systems Concerned with the Professional Role Issue Understanding the type of system and its general characteris- tics in which the addressed problem is embedded is crucial for choosing the frame of reference that is appropriate for system investigation. In this context, systems refer to Human Social Activity Systems (HSAS) exhibiting the following characteris- tics: being open systems, depending on their external interac- tion (with their environment) as well as on their internal inter- actions (within-system), and governed by balancing and rein- forcing feedback mechanisms (Banathy & Jenlink, 2004; Senge, 1990). They are composed of subsystems capable of making transformations of inputs to produce outputs for use by other subsystems, and characterized by alignment (Hummelbrunner, 2011). For example, systemic change efforts in midwifery role have been the focus of attention of many international organi- zations calling for a fundamental change in reinforcing profes- sional role as a key to quality health services. These calls seek not only a change in the educational activities but a deep change in many systems such as political system, society, and the organization of the discipline itself through establishing regulation, midwifery models of care, etc. (Brodie, 2002; Homer et al., 2009; United Nations Population Fund, 2010). Consequently, it is presumed that such perspective has tremens- dous implications on improving maternal health according to the strategies aiming to attain Millennium Development Goals 4 & 51 (World Health Organization, 2002). As a result, profes- sional role change in the health sphere cannot be examined without considering the systems that modulate the role. As we seek to understand the systems view to professional role change, it will be helpful to introduce a conceptual framework which explains the underpinnings of this view. Paradigmati c Conceptual Model for Health Professional Ro le The nature of instigations to role change fit into the triadic conceptual model of paradigms developed by Hatem-Asmar (1997, 2002). The authors highlight the importance of taking into account three systems (socio-cultural, educational, disci- plinary) as a whole system for addressing a health professional role change. The authors consider those three systems, includ- 1MDG4: to reduce child mortality ; M DG5 : t o improve maternal health. Open Access 492
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. ing their dimensions, to have an interactional relationship within which a professional role evolves, acknowledging the complex nature of developing an educational program for health professionals. The authors adopted Bertrand and Valois (1982) model who demonstrated the need to consider the mutu- ally reinforcing links between educational and socio-cultural paradigms, based on their systemic nature, while developing an educational program intended for school students and for tech- nicians; choosing an educational paradigm depends on the dominant socio-cultural paradigm and its corresponding type of society. As stated by these authors, education in any society is a reflection of the collective beliefs, values and needs of that society which are manifested in terms of the educational goals; these goals shape the content of the educational program and make it relevant to the aspirations of the society. Thus, society and education are considered as open social systems, repre- senting one for the other the external energy used to regenerate the system (Rousseau, Desmet, & Paradis, 1989). The charac- teristics of these systems embrace: i) the environment within which this system operates; ii) the relevant structures so called elements within a system to bring about the desired change; iii) the operator that represents numerous actors whose functions relate to handling the variables of action; iv) the variables of action allowing the operator to process the transformation from input to output (methods); and finally; v) the essential variables which consist of criteria for measuring the success of the mis- sion assigned to the educational institution (goals). Bertrand and Valois (1982) also demonstrated that the relation between the socio-cultural paradigms and the educational institutions, through various logics—the cybernetic logic of causality, the logic of systemic approach and the self-determination of the socio-cultural systems, is bidirectional. Relying on this relation, they stipulated that the socio-cultural paradigm guides the edu- cational one. However, despite the dominance of the socio- cultural paradigm, the educational institution has the capacity to be self-determinate, to choose an educational paradigm differ- ent from that imposed by the dominant socio-cultural paradigm and thus to produce changes through fulfilling three main func- tions: creation, adaptation and reproduction. Hatem-Asmar et al. (2002) shed light on the limitations of this thinking when applied to a health profession and emphasize the need for a third paradigm called the disciplinary paradigm which considers the characteristics pertaining to the profession itself. Similarly, they demonstrate the systemic nature of a health profession to make explicit its interaction with the other two systems (socio-cultural and educational) by referring to the characteristics of a system. As a result, they hypothesized that a health profession presents the following main characteristics of a system: i) the environment that is the context in which the professional as part of the system operates; ii) the system that comprises the structures to make the desired change (e.g. the governmental bodies concerned by the legalization of the pro- fession and its subsequent implementation); iii) the operator whose function relates to handling the variables of action (e.g. practitioners, educators); iv) the variables of action (means) consisting of the health care services provided by health profes- sionals to patients and their families; and finally v) the key variables corresponding to the targets considered as the ex- pected impact of the professional practice on population’s health. Based on this rationale which demonstrates the linkages between these three paradigms that have the systemic charac- teristics, this conceptual approach considers three systems to have an interactional relationship explained by the fact that any change in a single system does not remain isolated but can in- fluence the two other systems. The model further acknowledges the four inter-dimensions relationships within each system which means between: 1) the axiology/values (beliefs, legal, moral grounding); 2) the meth- odology (organizational procedures used to represent a problem and its solutions); 3) the ontology/actors (persons or entities physically and mentally involved in the process); and finally, 4) the teleology/targets (intentions, ultimate goals and solutions) (Hatem-Asmar et al., 2002). As a conclusion, changing a health professional role involves profound changes in the socio-cultural and disciplinary systems that interact with the educational one. Applying the Conceptual Model to Midwifery Role Change We seek to demonstrate how this model can be applied em- pirically in the field of midwifery professional role change. According to the systems change approach, leveraging change in a single system will not lead to the desired outcome unless coupled with changes occurring in other parts of the system; what counts are the properties that emerge from a whole rather than the parts (Checkland, 1999). Consequently, a broader view allows one to see the evolution of a health professional role as an emergent property of the synergistic relationships among the socio-cultural, educational, and disciplinary systems and among each system’s dimensions which constitutes “a functioning whole” (Laszlo & Krippner, 1998; Trochim et al., 2006: p. 539). Therefore, producing a fully qualified midwife fit to practice, according to the needs of society in an enabling environment, is determined by a multi-conceptual faceted systems interacting in synergy where no single system’s influence dominates. It is considered as a second order change involving a radical rupture with past frames (Gash & Orlikowski, 1991). In the case of midwifery, such a change has been triggered by various inter- national calls to develop an autonomous, self-regulated mid- wifery workforce capable of fulfilling the woman-centered philosophical midwifery mandate which promotes a human rights-based approach to reduce maternal mortality (United Nations Population Fund, 2011; World Health Organization, 2011b). Relying on Hatem-Asmar model, we will illustrate in the following section how the characteristics of human social activ- ity systems (HSAS) under investigation can be applied to the midwifery domain. The following characteristics are discussed: transformation, alignment and feedback. Transformation: Systems transform inputs, flowing from the external environment and from subsystems, into outputs, in order to sustain the life of the system (Banathy & Jenlink, 2004; Hummelbrunner, 2011). In the case of midwifery, the educa- tional system processes inputs coming from the larger society, represented for instance by the potential candidate who is seek- ing to be enrolled in the midwifery education program, who enters the educational system and then undergoes the educa- tional transformation process (e.g. methods of learning) to be- come a qualified midwife. Thereafter, she enters again in the disciplinary system in which her professional qualifications are put into practice under the specific regulatory conditions in order to perform properly and autonomously. Those services are considered as inputs for the socio-cultural system that is, if Open Access 493
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. used adequately, contribute to improving the performance of health systems (e.g. continuity of maternal ca re) and ultimately women’s health. Quality reproductive health services will aid to increase the demand of midwifery services which in turn will help to enhance awareness of the importance of these services and consequently, improve the midwifery image and gain wide- spread legitimacy from the public. This will have a potential appealing effect on pursuing a career in midwifery and on en- rollment of new candidates in th e midwifery education. Alignment: Contribution to improving maternal outcomes thru strengthening midwifery professional role will not occur unless improvement is set up concurrently in the socio-cultural, educational and disciplinary systems. For the intervention to succeed, it must align each of these three systems: indeed, the midwifery educational program should reflect the values of the society and be consistent with the social needs. Those values should then be incorporated into the language of the legislation, regulation, and standards of practice governing the redesigned professional role (World Health Organization, 2011b). Deliv- ering health services must also be grounded in the philosophy underpinning the educational foundation for practice (a phi- losophy that promotes a non-interventionist approach) (United Nations Population Fund, 2011). A case example outlining the re-emergence of midwifery profession in Quebec can serve for giving further insight into analysis of systems alignment. In the late 1980’s, the social feminism movement, demanding for control over natural child- birth and the political commitment to promote maternal health, have led to the legalization and the implementation of the mid- wifery profession following the favorable results of the evalua- tion of midwifery practice in Quebec (Blais & Joubert, 2000). This was the drive for establishing a student-centered education program that aimed to develop the necessary competencies to provide women-centered care and also to align midwifery edu- cation with the philosophy of the profession (Hatem-Asmar, 1997; Hatem-Asmar & Fraser, 2004). It also led to setting up a supportive legislative and regulatory environment governing midwifery education and practice. Nevertheless, many chal- lenges to the integration of midwives into the health care sys- tem were documented during the evaluation phase such as: i) lack of knowledge about the practice of midwifery on the part of other health care providers; ii) deficiencies in the legal and organizational structure of the pilot-projects; iii) competition over professional territories; and iv) gaps between the mid- wives’ and other providers’ professional cultures (Collin et al., 2000). Till date, integration of midwives into the Quebec’s healthcare system remains difficult to achieve, due to deficient interdisciplinary collaboration with other maternity care pro- viders resulting from the medical profession’s opposition to midwifery care in some cases. In this example, a mismatch is evident between the educa ti onal system on the one hand and the socio-cultural and disciplinary systems on the other hand. Negative interaction and misalignment between the three sys- tems remain as midwives are currently being educated accord- ing to the midwifery philosophy of care (values) but are still experiencing in the practice settings difficult collaborative rela- tionships (methods) with physicians and nurses which restrain them from putting their competencies into practice in hospitals settings limiting therefore their practice to birthing homes (Collin et al., 2000). Challenges to successful integration is still giving rise to adverse consequences for outcomes, thus affect- ing the continuity of care, and putting mothers and babies at risk (outcomes) (Klein, 2002). Feedback: It is considered as the positive or negative re- sponse that may facilitate or constrain the intervention from attaining the expected outcomes (World Health Organization, 2009). One example is the humanistic philosophy of care im- plying new collaborative models of care between care providers in the disciplinary system. If this new vision encounters resis- tance from physicians, it will then require a reaction in other systems such as making adjustment in the socio-cultural system and establishing new maternal policy initiatives and mecha- nisms of care in clinical settings for successfully attaining the desired outcomes. In conclusion, reviewing the type of systems in which the addressed problem is embedded, has implications for the way interventions are designed to solve the problem, implemented and evaluated. Designing an Intervention Concerned with Health Professional Ro le Through the application of the conceptual framework to the case of midwifery profession in Quebec, an attempt has been made to validate it empirically and to demonstrate the theoreti- cal foundations for designing an intervention aiming to change a health professional role. French et al. (2012) among other researchers, advance that the use of theory along with the re- sults of empirical methods research, will allow to assess the barriers of and facilitators for implementation problem and decide upon intervention components in order to build a sound theoretically informed solutions. Therefore, we consider that the model provides a strong theoretical rationale for the design of the intervention, that allows analyzing the multiple facets of the health profession situation (Hatem, 2008). Consequently, we advance that the intervention will have to consider introducing sets of complementary changes in three systems with the intention of consolidating the whole system as a central unit of change for broad scale improvement of a health professional role in order to maximize the probability of suc- cess. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the different com- ponents of the intervention will be situationally determined by the problem being addressed and empirically investigated within the local context. Depending on the situation, it should target either solely or conjointly education, the current position and image of the health profession in the society, the legislative framework that governs the profession, the human resources management framework (e.g. working conditions), etc. (World Health Organization, 2003). Our Experience of Designing a Theory-Based Intervention in the Midwifery Field Following the international trend to effectively reduce ma- ternal mortality, a multi-systems Action Plan concerning the midwifery professional role has been recently developed in Morocco (Hatem, 2008). The aim of the intervention was to provide fully qualified midwives trained according to the In- ternational Confederation of Midwives (ICM) Essential Com- petencies for Basic Midwifery Practice (Thompson, Fullerton, & Sawyer, 2011) to assist every woman through the reproduc- tive life (United Nations Population Fund, 2010; World Health Organization, 2011a). To develop the midwifery intervention, the conceptual model of Hatem-Asmar et al. (2002) was adopted using a three-step approach translating thus theory into intervention design: Open Access 494
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. 1) Assessing the current problem concerning the midwifery profession by identifying the barriers and facilitators to the professional role (target of change) that need to be addressed in order to guide the choice of intervention components. Barriers to, and facilitators of, the profession were identified during the diagnostic phase and linked to each of the three- system’s dimensions (values, methods, actors, targets) in an empirical qualitative study conducted through focus group in- terviews with many stakeholders in Morocco. The results re- vealed that the midwifery profession’s problem is deeply grounded, not just in education, but within the current image and visibility of the profession in the society and in the profes- sional community, and is related also to the legal framework, to the professional scope of practice and conditions of work (Hatem, 2008). It showed clearly that the midwife is trained in a technocratic educational system, which prepares her to prac- tice according to a biomedical disciplinary system in a socio- cultural system that does not consider nor value the human being (Hatem, 2008). In sum, the existing of such midwifery workforce in Morocco was not an appropriate mechanism to the full realization of the potential of the midwife as a key con- tributor to a safe motherhood process, to advocate the position of women in society and their reproductive health rights, and subsequently to reduce MM (World Health Organization, 2011a). 2) Designing an Action Plan consisting of components in- tended to overcome the local barriers identified based on the expertise of the consultant but mainly on the potential solutions suggested by the key informants from the Moroccan field (health professionals, midwifery educators, policy decision makers, health programmer, etc.). Selection of components was informed by the list of barriers and facilitators established. For example: within the socio-cultural system, to address the barrier related to the values dimension (midwifery image and lack of visibility in the society), social marketing activities were cho- sen to promote the professional role of the midwife; within the educational system: as regards to barrier related to the tradi- tional educational methods for delivering knowledge, increas- ing material educational resources (anatomic models) to fit with the new competency-based approach were selected. In sum, the Action Plan was designed to be implemented in the three systems (socio-cultural, educational, disciplinary). It focused on the values, methods, actors and targets of the three systems as a whole. The whole being the interaction of the in- tervention with the dimensions of the three systems in which the midwife operates. 3) Validation of the proposed intervention through a work- shop involving several key persons belonging to the education, political and clinical field. The objective was to explain the theoretical underpinnings of the adopted pathways to change, to check the relevance of the intervention and to readjust it ac- cording to the views expressed. In conclusion, the growth of change efforts in health profes- sional role leads naturally to evaluative attempts of such initia- tives which will be covered in the following sections. The Relevance of an Implementation-Focused Evaluation Evaluation approaches serve a number of purposes which can be developmental, formative, summative, or focused on moni- toring and accountability. Evaluation designs, adopting forma- tive approaches, are more likely to be of greater value at the early phase of an innovation cycle (Patton, 2002, 2008). Im- plementation of interventions has been reported to present many challenges: it does not occur in a vacuum, it is sensitive to local context and it can fail because of unforeseen contextual barriers. There is general agreement among researchers that interventions cannot be treated as black boxes independent of their social, political, educational and professional contexts (Champagne et al., 2011; Love, 2004). As such, a good under- standing of the potential interactions between the intervention and the context in which the intervention is implemented proves to be crucial. Process evaluation is particularly well suited for understand- ing how the intervention outspreads under the specific context conditions, for capturing information in real time and for keep- ing consequently the iterative developmental process (Ho & Schwen, 2006; Hummelbrunner, 2011; Pettigrew, Woodman, & Cameron, 2001). It allows to generate lessons in order to fine- tune the intervention to make effective adjustments as imple- mentation progresses, and increases thus the likelihood of changing a factor from a barrier to a driver (Champagne et al., 2011; Love, 2004; Patton, 1997; Varkey, Horne, & Bennet, 2008). Besides, implementation information plays a critical role in the accurate interpretation of evaluation outcomes, since it can help in understanding how those outcomes are reached (Damschroder et al., 2009; May et al., 2007). As such it pro- vides many advantages to implementation success and long- term sustainability (Stetler et al., 2006). The Conceptual Framework: A Comprehensive Evaluation Framework for Health Professional Role Change Theory Basis for the Proposed Framework Understanding the implementation of an intervention aiming to change a health professional role requires a framework that examines the congruence of the intervention with the context, and how the salient components of the intervention are unfold- ing within the boundaries of three complex human activity systems: 1) socio-cultural; 2) educational; and 3) disciplinary systems. We propose a conceptual framework that incorporates in- sights from Hatem-Asmar et al. (2002) model discussed earlier, and from the meta-theoretical framework developed by Dam- schroder et al. (2009) to carry out implementation analysis. In the following, we provide our rationale for choosing these models and outline the theoretical principles supporting our conceptual framework. Hatem-Asmar Model: Hatem-Asmar (1997) argue that it is unlikely that problems related to the health professional role be correctly diagnosed and addressed without adopting the inter- acting three systems approach, precisely because problems often lie in the three systems in which evolves a health profes- sional role. In our case, the context, defined according to im- plementation research as the “environment or setting in which the proposed change is to be implemented” (Kitson, Harvey, & McCormack, 1998), is a multiple systems environment. It serves as the basis of our Evaluation Framework which is more suitable for illustrating what a professional role’s intervention should target and how it should be evaluated. Therefore, our framework builds on the work of Hatem-Asmar et al. (2002) to identify the context through which the intervention proceeds Open Access 495
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. which is represented by the three interacting systems (the socio-cultural, educational, disciplinary systems). The added value to using the three systems is: i) mapping the broad-based change; ii) providing a structure to examine the context of im- plementing the intervention to change a health professional role; iii) and considering relationships within, between dimensions across the systems and the intervention to be evaluated captur- ing thus the dynamic nature of the implementation process. To track the implementation process and the interaction of the systems with the intervention involved in the change proc- ess through the lens of implementation theories, we used the meta-theoretical framework developed by Damschroder et al. (2009) which can provide the analytical lens needed to explore the phenomenon under study. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Re- search (CFIR) (Damschroder et al., 2009): The CFIR is grounded in implementation theories and can be applied for exploring a wide variety of interventions in the health care set- tings across multiple contexts (Ilott, Gerrish, Booth, & Field, 2012). It provides a comprehensive taxonomy of orienting con- structs that have been drawn from a synthesis of nineteen theo- ries (e.g. dissemination, innovation, organizational change) and can be used to guide formative evaluation and to understand the complexity of implementation. The CFIR offers a typology of constructs classified in five key domains, without specifying causal relationships between them, that are critical to successful implementation. These domains are identified as: 1) The characteristics of individuals involved with the im- plementation process represented by five constructs (e.g., knowledge, self-efficacy, stage of change, personal attributes, identification with organization, etc.); 2) The outer setting which refers to the broad environment in which implementation occurs, and includes the political, social and economic context, involving four constructs (e.g., external policy and incentives, patient needs and resources); 3) The inner setting comprises five constructs concerned with features of the organization (e.g., structural characteristics, cul- ture, networks and communication, readiness for implementa- tion, etc.); 4) The characteristics of the intervention influencing imple- mentation which consider eight constructs that must be taken into account (e.g., intervention source, evidence strength and quality, relative advantage, adaptability, complexity); and fi- nally, 5) The process of implementation which is the active change process embracing four essential constructs (planning, engaging, executing, reflecting, evaluating). The five domains offer a comprehensive view that considers importantly both the intervention and the implementation (Damschroder & Hagedorn, 2011; Ilott et al., 2012). The CFIR can serve as a foundational framework to organize qualitative findings related to the influencing context (Dam- schroder & Hagedorn, 2011). Consequently, the CFIR will not be applied as a predetermined conceptual framework. It will be used as an analytical tool to frame the observed barriers and facilitators through its menu of constructs, along the four di- mensions of each of the three systems framework, and how they interact to influence implementation across the systems. Using an inductive approach, the CFIR will help us to: “map” the emergent themes from the synthesized data to con- structs in the CFIR without forcing data into predetermined codes; and to clarify the constructs at play in facilitating or hampering the implementation. Applying themes at the construct/sub-construct level will be done for all domains. Nevertheless, constructs of two domains (Inner and Outer Settings) will be applied to the dimensions of the three systems and will not be classified under Inner and Outer Settings domains as in our case there is no single set Inner Setting versus Outer Setting due to the complex nature of the interrelated systems under study. This approach mapping the data to a theory-driven concep- tual framework has been advocated by MacFarlane and O’Reilly-de Brún (2011) to qualitatively evaluate general prac- titioners’ uptake of the language interpreting service in the Republic of Ireland. We consider that these two models are well positioned to understand the context at play for successfully implementing and reaching the outcomes of an intervention, to synthesize our findings and to draw conclusions from our analysis. Nevertheless, designing a framework requires steps such as: 1) defining the phenomenon of interest (the context of imple- mentation represented by the interaction of the three systems with the intervention) that are the domain of the investigation; and 2) suggesting possible ways to operationalize it (Seidman, 1988: p. 5) to illuminate t h u s the scope of the evaluation. We have already demonstrated that the three systems are considered as human social activity system (HSAS) made of dimensions that interact effectively and efficiently internally and externally. Referring to Checkland (1981), “HSAS are structured sets of people who make up the system, coupled with a collection of activities such as processing information, mak- ing plans”, etc. (as cited in Banathy, 1996: p. 14). Ackoff and Emery (1972) also characterized HSAS as purposeful systems and goal-oriented that select goals as well as the means to pur- sue them (as cited in Banathy, 1996: p. 14). Actions are carried out according to the values, and in case of misalignment be- tween system components, significant challenges emerge. As well, Banathy defines a HSAS as: “An assembly of people who select and carry out activities-individually and collectively— that will enable them to attain a collectively identified purpose” (Banathy, 1996). Through focusing on the three systems, such framework widens the scope of analysis by emphasizing the whole context within which the intervention is supposed to work thus, to change a health professional role. Description of the Conceptual Framework The framework depicted in Figure 1 highlights three spheres: The first sphere corresponds to the context of the interven- tion comprising three lozenges that represent the three systems (with their four interrelated dimensions) that are interacting with each other’s and with the intervention which lies at the centre of the three systems to bring about the desired change. These systems serve as a foundation for understanding the im- plementation process from a holistic perspective. Implementing the intervention is influenced by the interre- lated dimensions of the three interacting systems and by the characteristics of the intervention itself. These systems repre- sented by a lozenge are: I) the socio-cultural system; II) the educational system; and III) the disciplinary system. As for the middle sphere, it corresponds to the extent of co- herence, degree of alignment (synergy) or misalignment (an tagonism), among the various dimensions of systems, and the intervention which form the ceus of the evaluative ntral foc Open Access 496
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. Open Access 497 Figure 1. Proposed conceptual framework to evaluate the implementation of a complex intervention aiming to change a health professional role. framework. Those two spheres are surrounded by an external one which represents the analytical conceptual lens through which we can map the themes, using an inductive approach, on to the CIFR constructs of the five domains : 1) characteristics of the inter- vention, 2) the outer setting; 3) the inner setting; and, 4) the characteristics of individuals. The fifth (5) domain passes across the centre of the three spheres and corresponds to the process by which implementa- tion is executed. Bi-directional arrows express the inter-relatedness of the three systems and symbolize their interaction with the interven- tion. Each lozenge includes interrelated dimensions derived from the system conceptualization of Hatem-Asmar within which potential facilitators or barriers to the implementation process could lie. The development of a framework requires that we: 1) present the three systems; and 2) define and describe their dimensions. Systems and Core Dimensions: Drawing on Hatem-Asmar model, each empirical HSAS is conceptualized as made of a set of four interrelated dimensions: values, system methods, actors, and targets. The three lozenges representing the three systems are the following: I) Socio-cultural lozenge. It represents the larger societal system, encompassing political (governmental bodies—e.g. the ministry of he alth), and social s ystems at large (civ il society, e.g. women). It concerns the values and expectations of society, laws and regulations (Hatem-Asmar et al., 2002). It may include in- fluencing factors exerting the broadest level of influence on the implementation process (e.g. the social and political setting) (Damschroder et al., 2009). II) Educational lozenge. According to Hatem-Asmar et al. (2002), it corresponds to the underlying approaches and princi- ple prevailing in this system ; educational m ethods for optimi zing the preparation of health professionals and attain the training goals. III) Disciplinary loze nge. I t repre sent s th e d iscip li nar y s ystem which is inherent to the characteristics pertaining to the profes- sion. It outlin es the v alues of its m embers, methods and p ractical approaches used; the organisation of health professions includ- ing relationships with other professional groups; and finally the goals of developing their role. Since the three systems are made of set of dimensions that work together and with the intervention for the overall objec- tive (change of a health professional role), we need to define the underlying dimensions at play. An empirical human social activity system can be described as having values that guide activities in which actors are involved, to attain goals—that are directly or indirectly perceived to have influence on the imple- mentation process. Within each system, influences among di- mensions are bi-directional. We will address those concepts for gaining insight into empirical systems in practice. 1) Values. Refer to the rules and legal grounding of each sys- tem that steer their methods. Values drive the behaviour of the system actors; According to Senge (1990), mental models re- flect the beliefs , values that w e p ersonally hold, and underlie our reasons for doing things the way we do. 2) Methods. This dimension refers to organizational proce- dures used to represent a problem and its solutions. Systems enact different methods to attain their targets such as commu- nication and coordination activities within and across systems, organization and distribution of resources across institutions involved in the implementation process (Tseng & Seidman, 2007). Methods must be congruent with the values prevailing in the system in order to attain the target (Hatem-Asmar et al., 2002). 3) Actors. They refer to the heterogeneous groups of actors intervening at multiple levels and involved in the process. Ac- tors are characterized by their attitudes, skills, motivation needed to facilitate or constrain the change (Damschroder et al.,
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. 2009; Grol, 1997). For example, policymakers, women are key contributors to the functioning of the socio-cultural system whereas academic directors and students play a crucial role in the educational system. Actors in the disciplinary system are the health professionals from various disciplines. 4) Targets. It’s about the intentions, purposes, and ultimate goals of a system. The Intervention: Given the contribution of intervention characteristics to implementation success, we will consider in our framework the perceptions of the different participants to identify the key attributes of the intervention that might facili- tate or impede its implementation. In order to do so, an induc- tive investigative approach is adopted and analysis is guided by the framework developed by Damschroder et al. (2009). In sum, we propose a comprehensive framework that in- cludes a holistic view of the three systems interacting with the intervention, that can assist in understanding the numerous potentially relevant factors influencing the implementation through the “menu of constructs” approach identified in the CFIR. Interactions between the Systems and the Intervention: Centre Piece of the Framework: The theory underpinning our framework would allow to conduct an evaluation and to search for the extent of coherence, degree of alignment (synergy) or misalignment (antagonism), among the various dimensions of each system, and the intervention (e.g. between the values, methods, etc. of the educational institutions, the clinical settings and the intervention). Building upon these interactions, it is possible to identify the barriers and facilitators associated with the intervention’s success and challenges. We consider that the greatest contribution to enhancing implementation may lie in these interactions which form the central focus of the evaluative framework. Such results could inform the development of activities that are tailored to address these barriers for more effective imple- mentation and moreover to realize the full benefits of role change. A Pattern for Understanding the Evaluation Conceptual Framework: Review of a Jordanian Study on Barriers to Developing Midwifery as a Primary Healthcare Strategy To further explain our framework, we will use as an example a study on barriers to and facilitators for developing midwifery primary healthcare practice and will lay out an explanation of how the findings can be looked at using our framework. We will draw also a hypothetical situation (implementing an inter- vention such as a competency-based education program) in order to exemplify how the dimensions within these three sys- tems and the intervention through the lens of the CFIR frame- work might facilitate or impede the implementation process. The case example concerns the results of an action research led by Shaban, Barclay, Lock, and Homer (2012) across three re- gions of Jordan to identify the barriers to developing midwifery as a primary healthcare strategy. Five main barriers were re- ported: 1) a lack of professional recognition; 2) a lack of recog- nition and status for midwifery within society; 3) high levels of stress and workload; 4) medical domination of health services; and 5) problems with the quality of midwifery education. Re- ferring to our framework, we can explain how these findings can be looked at in terms of the systems dimensions of the in- ternal sphere. For example, the findings, regarding the poor image and lack of recognition of midwifery within society, pertain within our framework to social representations defined by key elements (beliefs, opinions) (Abric, 1994) which are related to the values dimension of the socio-cultural system. High levels of stress and workload are classified as part of the methodology of the disciplinary system, because they reflect that practicing midwives are working in stressful environments. As for the medical domination of health services, these reflect the prevailing interactions between the disciplines which con- cerns the methodology dimension of the disciplinary system. Concerning midwifery education, major issues related to the quality of clinical placements, the competency of educators and the level of supervision of midwifery students were highlighted. The competency of educators is one of the characteristics of actors in the educational system. As for the clinical placements and the level of supervision of midwifery students, these pertain to the methodology as they are about the resources and the ac- tions taken in the educational system to improve midwives’ training. To illustrate the interaction of the three systems, we stipulate that any undertaking for the dimensions of the socio-cultural system provides a feedback to the dimensions of the educa- tional or and disciplinary systems and vice versa. According to the results of a study conducted by the same authors on mid- wifery education in Jordan (Shaban & Leap, 2011), the mid- wifery education curriculum reflects a medical model, with an emphasis on illness and intervention rather than preparation for the internationally defined full role of the midwife. Based on the results of the two Jordanian studies, we can stipulate that values in the socio-cultural system (social representations about midwifery’s image) and in the educational (prevailing philosophy of medical model) and methods in the disciplinary systems (medical domination of health services) are viewed as dimensions that interact negatively constraining thereby mid- wives in Jordan to be positioned as primary maternal providers for women. We can draw a hypothetical situation and try to explore what would be the barriers or facilitators according to the constructs of the CFIR (the external sphere of our framework) across the three interacting systems and the intervention if we attempt to implement an intervention such as a competency-based educa- tion (CBE) program. We stipulate that a midwifery program must be based on a “humanistic” philosophy in order to prepare a competent midwife capable of empowering women and pro- moting health reproductive care (World Health Organization, 2011c). Nevertheless, implementation might be constrained by the existing socio-cultural and disciplinary systems that are not aligned with the intervention focusing only on the educational system. Transferring the new midwifery competencies accord- ing to the humanistic educational philosophy into practice field (disciplinary system) would be constrained by the prevailing biomedical culture of the professional groups in this system (values-culture) that support functioning within professional hierarchies; and also the ongoing hierarchical medical work relationships instead of collaborative teamwork (methods-net- works) in the clinical settings among professionals. Moreover, we argue that actors (actors-attitudes) might be source of resis- tance as they are not trained to practice according to the new philosophy, and also due to issues of territoriality. In sum, practicing within the fractured maternity care which operates under the medical system might not allow midwives to apply Open Access 498
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. the skills acquired during the training, to their job settings. Regarding the barriers related to the CBE program, if new competencies are introduced (e.g. newborn life saving skills) according to the international guidelines without approval of the medical profession (Intervention source), attitudes of resis- tance will result in rejecting the new program as it might be not congruent with their beliefs. Based on the forgoing discussion, we can refer to the middle sphere of our framework and state that values in the educational system are misali gned with the values, methods and character- istics of actors and targets within the disciplinary system; and the intervention is not aligned with the values of the profes- sional groups in the disciplinary system. Therefore, misalign- ment between the two systems and the intervention might con- strain the implementation process of an intervention focusing on one system and not considering the whole change and might be an impediment to providing a fully qualified midwife fit to practice as a primary care provider. We also stipulate that if there is a strong political will to en- hance the midwife’s autonomy in Jordan in order to promote primary health care, compatible change across the three sys- tems in order to align them towards reaching the outcome must be initiated. Therefore, we assume that an “existential” socio- cultural system based on perspective that values the women- centered approach should be enhanced in Jordan. The current “technocratic” educational system and “biomedical-based” dis- ciplinary system promoting risk-pregnancy practices should also be replaced by a “humanistic” educational system and a “health-based” disciplinary system in order to be aligned with the “existential” socio-cultural system (Hatem-Asmar et al., 2002). Therefore, any intervention focusing exclusively on one system only provides a part of the equation as each system is a vital dimension to enable the entire system to attain the goal. Based on this example, we have demonstrated the utility of our framework to depict the barriers and or facilitators within and across the three interacting systems with the intervention to facilitate the change process. Implications The present article makes valuable contributions to the field of the evaluation of professions and is innovative in three ways: Firstly, the model is the first to adopt holistic perspective to analyze the implementation of a health profession intervention acknowledging i) the complexity of the process needed to change a health professional role; ii) the requisite to take into account the interaction between the three systems and the in- tervention if an intervention is to be fruitful in improving a health profession and achieving better health outcomes. Secondly, the model aims to provide a conceptual tool for research design, analysis and interpretation for studies related to workforce innovation’s implementation. Indeed, with the aim of meeting health needs of countries, we propose our frame- work as a conceptual map to gain a rich understanding to analysis of changes to a health professional role. We speculate that it might also apply to a professional role in general. Our assumption is rooted in the statements made by Abbott (1988), that educational institution provides only recognition of the knowledge and competencies relevant to the profession without guaranteeing its right to practice or its position in soci- ety. In the light of these assumptions, we presume that the ulti- mate goals of any occupational group that strives to achieve are to: i) obtain public recognition and acceptance of the profes- sional status; ii) gain a legislative and regulatory authority for the role; iii) establish codes of ethics and high standards of practice; iv) receive an education centered on evidence-based competencies to improve the individual performance; and fi- nally, v) carry on activities in a motivating practice setting ac- cording to a well delineate code of practice. Relying on these professional needs, we stipulate that our framework might have potentially profound implications for professions across a range of disciplines. It offers a useful frame reference to: guide diag- nostic assessment, design and implement interventions and finally evaluate implementation progress of interventions aim- ing to change a professional role. Thirdly, a final insight of relevance is that the information gathered from an evaluation is crucial for evaluators, pol- icy-makers, health professionals, educators to identify where difficulties in implementation lie so that it can be alleviated in order to make prompt adjustments. The framework can also serve to judge the appropriateness of an intervention designed to change a health professional role. Conclusion This paper has provided an innovative-evaluative framework for investigating an intervention aiming to change a health pro- fessional role. We argued that the evaluation must focus on examining the coherence of the intervention with the three in- teracting systems (socio-cultural, educational, and disciplinary) within which it unfolds in order to provide valuable information and to avoid failures in further implementation efforts. Most importantly, the framework is a resource for program planners seeking to roll out an intervention throughout many countries facing high demands for role change and also researchers un- dertaking evaluations of such interventions. Acknowledgements The main author of this study benefited from financial sup- port in the form of a QTNPR scholarship (CIHR—Quebec Training Network in Perinatal Research) and a scholarship granted by The Research Institute in Public Health at the Uni- versité de Montreal (IRSPUM).The main author acknowledges the financial support for this research received from Professor Hatem. REFERENCES Abric, J.-C. (1994). Pratiques sociales et représentations . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Banathy, B. H. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. New York: Plenum Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9981-1 Banathy, B. H., & Jenlink, P. M. (2004). Systems inquiry and its appli- cation in education. In D. H. E. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of re- search for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 37-58). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bertrand, Y., & Valois, P. (1982). Les options en éducation. Québec: Gouvernement du Québec, Ministère de l’Éducation, Direction de la recherche. Blais, R., & Joubert, P. (2000). Evaluation of the midwifery pilot pro- jects in Quebec: An overview. L’equipe d’evaluation des projets-pi- lotes sages-femmes. [Comparative study multicenter study research support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 91, I1-I4. Open Access 499
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. Brodie, P. (2002). Addressing the barriers to midwifery—Australian midwives speaking out. The Australian Journal of Midwifery, 15, 5- 14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1031-170X(02)80003-4 Champagne, F., Brousselle, A., Hartz, Z., Contandriopoulos, A.-P., & Denis, J.-L. (2011). L’analyse de l’implantation. In A. Brousselle, F. Champagne, A.-P. Contandriopoulos, & Z. Hartz (Eds.), L’évalua- tion: Concepts et méthodes (2 mise à jour ed., pp. 238-273). Mon- tréal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal. Checkland, P. (1999). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: John Wiley. Collin, J., Blais, R., White, D., Demers, A., Desbiens, F., & L’Équipe d’évaluation des projets-pilotes sages-femmes (2000). Integration of midwives into the Quebec Health Care System. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 91, 1-17. Damschroder, L. J., & Hagedorn, H. J. (2011). A guiding framework and approach for implementation research in substance use disorders treatment. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 25, 194-205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022284 Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander, J. A., & Lowery, J. C. (2009). Fostering implementation of health ser- vices research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4, 50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 Dubois, C.-A., & Singh, D. (2009). From staff-mix to skill-mix and beyond: Towards a systemic approach to health workforce manage- ment. Human Resources for Health, 7, 87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-7-87 Foster-Fishman, P., Nowell, B., & Yang, H. (2007). Putting the system back into systems change: A framework for understanding and changing organizational and community systems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 197-215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9109-0 Freidson, E. (1970). Profession of medicine: A study of the sociology of applied knowledge. New York: Harper & Row. French, S., Green, S., O’Connor, D., McKenzie, J., Francis, J., Michie, S., & Grimshaw, J. (2012). Developing theory-informed behaviour change interventions to implement evidence into practice: A system- atic approach using the theoretical domains framework. Implementa- tion Science, 7, 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-38 Gash, D. C., & Orlikowski, W. J. (1991). Changing frames: Towards an understanding of information technology and organizational change. http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46959/changingframes to00gash.pdf Grol, R. (1997). Personal paper. Beliefs and evidence in changing cli- nical practice. B MJ, 315 , 418-421. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7105.418 Hargreaves, M. B. (2010). Evaluating system change: A planning guide. http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/PDFs/health/eval_sy stem_change_methodbr.pdf Hatem, M. (2008). Rapport de fin de mission: Assistance technique pour la révision du programme de formation des sages-femmes dans le Royaume du Maroc. Rapport inédit. Hatem-Asmar, M. (1997). Choix éducationnels pour la formation des professionnels de la santé: Le cas de la profession de sage-femme au Québec. Thèse de doctorat in édite, Québec: Université de Montréal. Hatem-Asmar, M., & Fraser, W. (2004). La sage-femme du Québec: De la renaissance à la reconnaissance. Santé, Société et Solidarité, 3, 105-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/oss.2004.1231 Hatem-Asmar, M., Fraser, W., & Blais, R. (2002). Trois paradigmes pour développer un programme de formation des professionnels de la santé: Le cas de la formation des sages-femmes au Québec. Ruptures, Revue Transdisciplinaire en Santé, 9, 86-102. Ho, L.-A., & Schwen, T. M. (2006). Evaluation in the design of com- plex systems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 19, 135-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.2006.tb00369.x Homer, C. S., Passant, L., Brodie, P. M., Kildea, S., Leap, N., Pin- combe, J., & Thorogood, C. (2009). The role of the midwife in Aus- tralia: views of women and midwives. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Midwifery, 25, 673- 681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2007.11.003 Hummelbrunner, R. (2011). Systems thinking and evaluation. Evalua- tion, 17, 395-403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389011421935 Ilott, I., Gerrish, K., Booth, A., & Field, B. (2012). Testing the consoli- dated framework for implementation research on health care innova- tions from South Yorkshire. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Prac- tice. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01876.x Ison, R. L., Maiteny, P. T., & Carr, S. (1997). Systems methodologies for sustainable natural resources research and development. Agricul- tural Systems, 55, 257-27 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(97)00010-3 Kislov, R., Nelson, A., de Normanville, C., Kelly, P. M., & Payne, K. (2012). Work redesign and health promotion in healthcare organisa- tions: A review of the literature. Sheffield Hallam University. Kitson, A., Harvey, G., & McCormack, B. (1998). Enabling the imple- mentation of evidence based practice: A conceptual framework. Quality in Health Care, 7, 149-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qshc.7.3.149 Klein, M. C. (2002). Working symposium on midwifery, building our contribution to maternity care. Paper presented at the A Family Phy- sician’s Observations, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Kronus, C. L. (1987). The evolution of occupational power: An his- torical study of task boundaries between physicians and pharmacists. Sociology of Work and Occupations, 3, 3-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009392857600300101 Laszlo, A., & Krippner, S. (1998). Systems theories: Their origins, foundations, and development. In J. S. Jordan (Ed.), Systems theories and a priori aspects of perception (pp. 47-74). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(98)80017-4 Laurant, M., Harmsen , M., Faber, M., Wollersheim, H., Sib bald, B., & Grol, R. (2010). Revision of professional roles and quality improve- ment: A review of the evidence. London: The Health Foundation. Love, A. (2004). Implementation evaluation. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry, & K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (2nd ed., p p. 63-97). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. MacFarlane, A., & O’Reilly-de Brún, M. (2012). Using a theory-driven conceptual framework in qualitative health research. Qualitative Health Research, 22, 607-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049732311431898 May, C., Finch, T., Mair, F., Ballini, L., Dowrick, C., Eccles, M., & Heaven, B. (2007). Understanding the implementation of complex interventions in health care: The normalization process model. BMC Health Services Research, 7, 148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-148 McKenna, H., Keeney, S., & Hasson, F. (2009). Health care managers’ perspectives on new nursing and midwifery roles: Perceived impact on patient care and cost effectiveness. Journal of Nursing Manage- ment, 17, 627-635. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00948.x McKenna, M., Richey, R., K eeney, S., Hasson, F., Poulton, B., & Sin- clair, M. (2008). The managerial and development issues of nurses and midwives in new roles. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 22, 227-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6712.2007.00519.x Nancarrow, S., Moran, A. , Wiseman, L ., Pighills, A. C., & Murphy, K. (2012). Assessing the implementation process and outcomes of newly introduced assistant roles: A qualitative study to examine the utility of the Calderdale Framework as an appraisal tool. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 5, 307-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S35493 Parsons, B. (2007). The state of methods and tools for social systems change. American Journal of Community Psyc holog y, 39, 405-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9118-z Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, C A: Sa ge Pu bl ic a ti on s . Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.). Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Study- ing organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. The Academy of Management Journal, 44, 697-713. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069411 Rousseau, S., Desmet, R., & Paradis, L. (1989). L’organisation selon Open Access 500
S. ABOU-MALHAM ET AL. Open Access 501 Edgard Morin: Application à la communication et à l’éducation. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 15, 433-447. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/900642ar Sangster-Gormley, E., Martin-Misener, R., Downe-Wamboldt, B., & DiCenso, A. (2011). Factors affecting nurse practitioner role imple- mentation in Canadian practice settings: An integrative review. Jour- nal of Advanced Nursing, 67, 1178-1190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05571.x Seidman, E. (1988). Back to the future, community psychology: Un- folding a theory of social intervention. American Journal of Commu- nity Psychology, 16, 3-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00906069 Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Currency Doubleday. Shaban, I., & Leap, N. (2011). A review of midwifery education cur- riculum documents in Jordan. Women and Birth. Shaban, I., Barclay, L., Lock, L., & Homer, C. (2012). Barriers to de- veloping midwifery as a primary health-care strategy: A Jordanian study. Midwifery, 28, 106-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2010.11.012 Sibbald, B., Shen, J., & McBride, A. (2004). Changing the skill-mix of the health care workforce. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Re- view]. Journal of Health Service s Research & Policy, 9, 28-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581904322724112 Stetler, C., Legro, M., Wallace, C., Bowman, C., Guihan, M., Hagedorn, H., & Smith, J. (2006). The role of formative evaluation in imple- mentation research and the QUERI experience. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21, S1-S8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0267-9 Supovitz, J. A., & Taylor, B. S. (2005). Systemic education evaluation. American Journal of Evaluatio n, 26, 204-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214005276286 Thompson, J. B., Fullerton, J. T., & Sawyer, A. J. (2011). The interna- tional confederation of midwives: Global standards for midwifery education (2010) with companion guidelines. Midwifery, 27, 409- 416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2011.04.001 Trochim, W. M., Cabrera, D. A., Milstein, B., Gallagher, R. S., & Leischow, S. J. (2006). Practical challenges of systems thinking and modeling in public health. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 538-546. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2005.066001 Tseng, V., & Seidman, E. (2007). A systems framework for under- standing social settings. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 217-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9101-8 Turner, R. H. (1990). Role change. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 87- 110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.16.080190.000511 United Nations Population Fund (2010). Global call to action: Streng- then midwifery to save lives and promote health of women and newborns. http://www.unfpa.org/webdav/site/global/shared/documents/events/2 010/midwifery/Joint_Statement_Symposium_on_Strengthening_Mid wifery_Final_04JUN2010.pdf United Nations Population Fund (2011). The state of the world’s mid- wifery report 2011: Delivering healt h, saving lives. http://www.unfpa.org/sowmy/resources/docs/main_report/en_SOW MR_Full.pdf Varkey, P., Horne, A., & Bennet, K. E. (2008). Innovation in health care: A primer. American Journal of Medical Quality, 23, 382-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1062860608317695 World Health Organization (2002). Nursing and midwifery services: Strategic directions 2002-2008. www.searo.who.int World Health Organization (2003). Nursing and midwifery workforce manageme nt : C onc ep tua l f ramework. http://www.searo.who.int/entity/nursing_midwifery/documents/9290 222581/en/index.html World Health Organization (2009). Systems thinking for health systems strengthening. In D. D. Savigny, & T. Adam (Eds.), Alliance for health policyand systems research. France. World Health Organization (2011a). Strenghtening midwifery toolkit: Module 1—Strenghtening mi dw ifery: A ba ck ground paper. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241501965_module 1_eng.pdf World Health Organization (2011b). Strengthening midwifery toolkit: Module 2—Legislation and regulation of midwifery—Making safe motherhood possible. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241501965_module 2_eng.pdf World Health Organization (2011c). Strengthening midwifery toolkit: Module 5—Developing a midwifery curriculum for safe motherhood: Guidelines for midwifery eduaction programmes. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241501965_module 5_eng.pdf
|