Leaders’ experiences of successfully implementing health and welfare technology in sparsely populated Nordic areas

References

• European Commission. The 2018 ageing report: economic and budgetary projections for the EU Member States (2016–2070); 2018. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/economy-finance/ip079_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Stoumpos A, Kitsios F, Talias M. Digital transformation in healthcare: technology acceptance and its applications. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(4):1–44. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20043407.
   Google Scholar
• Alkhaldi B, Sahama T, Huxley C, et al. Barriers to implementing eHealth: a multi-dimensional perspective. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014;205:875–879.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alvarez RC. The promise of e-health - a Canadian perspective. eHealth Int. 2002;1(1):4. doi: 10.1186/1476-3591-1-4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Papoutsi C, et al. Beyond adoption: a new framework for theorizing and evaluating nonadoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health and care technologies. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(11):e367. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundvall B. Innovation studies: a personal interpretation of the state of the art. In: Fagerberg J, Martin BR, Andersen ES, editors. Innovation studies: evolution and future challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013. p. 20–70. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199686346.003.0002.
   Google Scholar
• Porter M. What is value in health care? N Engl J Med. 2010;363(26):2477–2481. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1011024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuoppamäki S. The application and deployment of welfare technology in Swedish municipal care: a qualitative study of procurement practices among municipal actors. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):918. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06944-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yusif S, Hafeez-Baig A, Soar J. e-health readiness assessment factors and measuring tools: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2017;107:56–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.08.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Fernández M, et al. Choosing implementation strategies to address contextual barriers: diversity in recommendations and future directions. Implement Sci. 2019;14(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0892-4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Armenakis A, Harris S, Mossholder K. Creating readiness for organizational change. Human Relations. 1993;46(6):681–703. doi: 10.1177/001872679304600601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotter JP. Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business Press. 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Weiner BJ. A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Sci. 2009;4(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dugstad JH, Nilsen E, Gullslett MK, et al. Implementering av velferdsteknologi i helse- og omsorgstjenester: opplæringsbehov og utforming av nye tjenester–en sluttrapport; 2015. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11250/285837
   Google Scholar
• Nilsen ER, Dugstad JH, Eide H, et al. Exploring resistance to implementation of welfare technology in municipal healthcare services – a longitudinal case study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):657. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1913-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zander V, Gustafsson C, Landerdahl Stridsberg S, et al. Implementation of welfare technology: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2023;18(6):1–16. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2021.1938707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boogerd E, Arts T, Engelen L, et al. What is eHealth?: time for an update? JMIR Res Protoc. 2015;4(1):e29. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4065.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rostad H, Stokke R. Integrating welfare technology in long-term care services: nationwide cross-sectional survey study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(8):e22316. doi: 10.2196/22316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wamala Andersson S, Richardson MX, Cozza M, et al. Addressing evidence in health and welfare technology interventions from different perspectives. Health Policy Technol. 2021;10(2):100519. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2021.100519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald M, Kruschwitz N, Bonnet D, et al. Embracing digital technology: a new strategic imperative. MIT Sloan Manag Rev. 2014;55(2):1. Available from: https://sloanreview.mit.edu/projects/embracing-digital-technology/
   Google Scholar
• Cresswell K, Sheikh A. Organizational issues in the implementation and adoption of health information technology innovations: an interpretative review. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(5):e73–e86. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.10.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granja C, Janssen W, Johansen M. Factors determining the success and failure of eHealth interventions: systematic review of the literature. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(5):e10235. doi: 10.2196/10235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong B, et al. Achieving change in primary care – causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews. Implementation Sci. 2015;11(1):1–39. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0396-4.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsen P, Bernhardsson S. Context matters in implementation science: a scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):189. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4015-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damschroder L, Aron DC, Keith RE, et al. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Sci. 2009;4(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aarons G, Horowitz J, Dlugosz L, Ehrhart M, editors. The role of organizational processes in dissemination and implementation research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Birken S, Shoou-Yih D, Weiner B. Uncovering Middle managers’ role in healthcare innovation implementation. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):28. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Damanpour F, Schneider M. Phases of the adoption of innovation in organizations: effects of environment, organization and top managers. Br J Manag. 2006;17(3):215–236. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00498.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aarons G, Sommerfeld D. Leadership, innovation climate, and attitudes toward evidence-based practice during a statewide implementation. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2012;51(4):423–431. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2012.01.018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams NJ, Wolk CB, Becker-Haimes EM, et al. Testing a theory of strategic implementation leadership, implementation climate, and clinicians’ use of evidence-based practice: a 5-year panel analysis. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-0970-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VOPD. Healthcare and care through distance spanning solutions, 24 practical examples from the Nordic region. Storuman: Healthcare and Care at Distance Project. Centre for Rural Medicine, Region Västerbotten, and Nordic Welfare Centre. 2019. Available from: https://nordicwelfare.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/NWC-VOPD-EN-webb.pdf
   Google Scholar
• VOPD. It is all about people. Impact on skills provision and organisation in health care and social care from increased use of distance spanning solutions. Storuman: Healthcare and Care at Distance Project. Centre for Rural Medicine, Region Västerbotten; Stockholm: Nordic Welfare Centre; 2021. Available from: https://www.healthcareatdistance.com/media/1311/it-s-all-about-the-people.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Research Council. Good research practice; 2017 [Uploaded 2023 October 6]. Available from: https://www.vr.se/english/analysis/reports/our-reports/2017-08-31-good-research-practice.html
   Google Scholar
• WMA. Handbook of WMA policies; 2022 [Uploaded 2023 October 6]. Available from: https://www.wma.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/HB-E-Version-2022-2-2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern‐based qualitative analytic approaches. Couns Psychother Res. 2021;21(1):37–47. doi: 10.1002/capr.12360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qual Res Psychol. 2021;18(3):328–352. doi: 10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertolazzi A, Quaglia V, Bongelli R. Barriers and facilitators to health technology adoption by older adults with chronic diseases: an integrative systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):506. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18036-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamp A, Obstfelder A, Andersson K. Welfare technologies in care work. NJWLS. 2019;9(S5):1. doi: 10.18291/njwls.v9iS5.112692.
   Google Scholar
• Melkas H, Pekkarinen Satu Saurio R, Gustafsson C, et al. Proactive health and welfare technology for Nordic users and societies – a policy brief; 2023 [Uploaded 2023 October 6]. Available from: https://lutpub.lut.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/165311/Proactive%20health%20and%20welfare%20technology%20for%20Nordic%20users%20and%20societies%20%e2%80%93%20A%20policy%20brief.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
   Google Scholar
• Scaccia J, Cook B, Lamont A, et al. A practical implementation science heuristic for organizational readiness: r = MC2. J Community Psychol. 2015;43(4):484–501. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21698.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronfenbrenner U. 1979. The ecology of human development. Boston: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Koller SH, Dos Santos Paludo S, Araujo de Morais N. Ecological engagement: urie Bronfenbrenner’s method to study human development. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W.H Freeman; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Armenakis AA, Harris SG. Reflections: our journey in organizational change research and practice. J Change Manag. 2009;9(2):127–142. doi: 10.1080/14697010902879079.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci. 2000;46(2):186–204. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aarons G, Ehrhart M, Moullin J, et al. Testing the leadership and organizational change for implementation (LOCI) intervention in substance abuse treatment: a cluster randomized trial study protocol. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0562-3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams N, Hugh M, Cooney D, et al. Testing a theory of implementation leadership and climate across autism evidence-based interventions of varying complexity. Behav Ther. 2022;53(5):900–912. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2022.03.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrhart M, Aarons G, Farahnak L. Assessing the organizational context for EBP implementation: the development and validity testing of the implementation climate scale (ICS). Implementation Sci. 2014;9(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0157-1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schein EH. Organizational culture and leadership. 4th ed. San Fransico: Jossey-Bass; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Dannapfel P, Nilsen P. Evidence-based physiotherapy culture – the influence of health care leaders in Sweden. Open J Leadersh. 2016;05(03):51–69. doi: 10.4236/ojl.2016.53006.
   Google Scholar
• Rerup C, Feldman MS. Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: the role of trial-and-error learning. Acad Manag J. 2011;54(3):577–610. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23045097 doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.61968107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dopfer K, Foster J, Potts J. Micro-meso-macro. J Evol Econ. 2004;14(3):263–279. doi: 10.1007/s00191-004-0193-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwemer E, Chen F, Beck Dallaghan GL, et al. Reinvigorating an academy of medical educators using ecological systems theory. Cureus. 2022;14(1):e21640. doi: 10.7759/cureus.21640.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priestland A, Hanig R. Developing first-level leaders. Harv Bus Rev. 2005;83(6):112–120, 150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerrish K, Keen C, Palfreyman J. Learning from a clinical microsystems quality improvement initiative to promote integrated care a cross falls care pathway. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2019;20(e62):e62. doi: 10.1017/S1463423618000567.
   Google Scholar
• Sung W, Kim C. A study on the effect of change management on organizational innovation: focusing on the mediating effect of members’ innovative behavior. Sustainability. 2021;13(4):2079. doi: 10.3390/su13042079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egeland K, Borge R, Peters N, et al. Individual-level associations between implementation leadership, climate, and anticipated outcomes: a time-lagged mediation analysis. Implement Sci Commun. 2023;4(1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00459-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar