PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 1, 2011Milbank Quarterly612 citationsOpen Access

Explaining Michigan: Developing an Ex Post Theory of a Quality Improvement Program

View Full Paper
MDMary Dixon‐WoodsCBCharles L. BoskEAEmma Louise Aveling

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

CONTEXT: Understanding how and why programs work-not simply whether they work-is crucial. Good theory is indispensable to advancing the science of improvement. We argue for the usefulness of ex post theorization of programs. METHODS: We propose an approach, located within the broad family of theory-oriented methods, for developing ex post theories of interventional programs. We use this approach to develop an ex post theory of the Michigan Intensive Care Unit (ICU) project, which attracted international attention by successfully reducing rates of central venous catheter bloodstream infections (CVC-BSIs). The procedure used to develop the ex post theory was (1) identify program leaders' initial theory of change and learning from running the program; (2) enhance this with new information in the form of theoretical contributions from social scientists; (3) synthesize prior and new information to produce an updated theory. FINDINGS: The Michigan project achieved its effects by (1) generating isomorphic pressures for ICUs to join the program and conform to its requirements; (2) creating a densely networked community with strong horizontal links that exerted normative pressures on members; (3) reframing CVC-BSIs as a social problem and addressing it through a professional movement combining "grassroots" features with a vertically integrating program structure; (4) using several interventions that functioned in different ways to shape a culture of commitment to doing better in practice; (5) harnessing data on infection rates as a disciplinary force; and (6) using "hard edges." CONCLUSIONS: Updating program theory in the light of experience from program implementation is essential to improving programs' generalizability and transferability, although it is not a substitute for concurrent evaluative fieldwork. Future iterations of programs based on the Michigan project, and improvement science more generally, may benefit from the updated theory present here.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Dixon‐Woods et al. (2011) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1a9668739ab56a9085b1dahttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00625.x
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Evidence-Based Quality Improvement: The State Of The Science2005 · 697 citations
  2. 2Moral Responsibility of Public Officials: The Problem of Many Hands1980 · 647 citations
  3. 3Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action1992 · 19,161 citations
  4. 4Engineering Culture: Control and Commitment in a High-Tech Corporation.1995 · 1,387 citations
  5. 5Forgive and Remember: Managing Medical Failure.1981 · 827 citations