» Articles » PMID: 32401224

The NASSS-CAT Tools for Understanding, Guiding, Monitoring, and Researching Technology Implementation Projects in Health and Social Care: Protocol for an Evaluation Study in Real-World Settings

Overview
Journal JMIR Res Protoc
Publisher JMIR Publications
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2020 May 14
PMID 32401224
Citations 51
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Projects to implement health care and social care innovations involving technologies are typically ambitious and complex. Many projects fail. Greenhalgh et al's nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework was developed to analyze the varied outcomes of such projects.

Objective: We sought to extend the NASSS framework to produce practical tools for understanding, guiding, monitoring, and researching technology projects in health care or social care settings.

Methods: Building on NASSS and a complexity assessment tool (CAT), the NASSS-CAT tools were developed (in various formats) in seven co-design workshops involving 50 stakeholders (industry executives, technical designers, policymakers, managers, clinicians, and patients). Using action research, they were and are being tested prospectively on a sample of case studies selected for variety in conditions, technologies, settings, scope and scale, policy context, and project goals.

Results: The co-design process resulted in four tools, available as free downloads. NASSS-CAT SHORT is a taster to introduce the instrument and gauge interest. NASSS-CAT LONG is intended to support reflection, due diligence, and preliminary planning. It maps complexity through stakeholder discussion across six domains, using free-text open questions (designed to generate a rich narrative and surface uncertainties and interdependencies) and a closed-question checklist; this version includes an action planning section. NASSS-CAT PROJECT is a 35-item instrument for monitoring how subjective complexity in a technology implementation project changes over time. NASSS-CAT INTERVIEW is a set of prompts for conducting semistructured research or evaluation interviews. Preliminary data from empirical case studies suggest that the NASSS-CAT tools can potentially identify, but cannot always help reconcile, contradictions and conflicts that block projects' progress.

Conclusions: The NASSS-CAT tools are a useful addition to existing implementation tools and frameworks. Further support of the implementation projects is ongoing. We are currently producing digital versions of the tools, and plan (subject to further funding) to establish an online community of practice for people interested in using and improving the tools, and hold workshops for building cross-project collaborations.

International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/16861.

Citing Articles

Understanding "Alert Fatigue" in Primary Care: Qualitative Systematic Review of General Practitioners Attitudes and Experiences of Clinical Alerts, Prompts, and Reminders.

Gani I, Litchfield I, Shukla D, Delanerolle G, Cockburn N, Pathmanathan A J Med Internet Res. 2025; 27:e62763.

PMID: 39918864 PMC: 11845892. DOI: 10.2196/62763.


Digital health interventions in adult intensive care and recovery after critical illness to promote survivorship care.

da Silva A, Merolli M, Fini N, Granger C, Gustafson O, Parry S J Intensive Care Soc. 2025; 26(1):96-104.

PMID: 39764433 PMC: 11700390. DOI: 10.1177/17511437241311105.


Exploring Opportunities and Challenges for the Spread, Scale-Up, and Sustainability of mHealth Apps for Self-Management of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Netherlands: Citizen Science Approach.

van Leersum C, Bults M, Siebrand E, Olthuis T, Bekhuis R, Konijnendijk A JMIR Diabetes. 2024; 9:e56917.

PMID: 39689302 PMC: 11688593. DOI: 10.2196/56917.


Process Evaluations for the Scale-Up of Complex Interventions - a Scoping Review.

Rathod L, Heine M, Boateng D, Martens M, van Olmen J, Marie Ku G Int J Integr Care. 2024; 24(4):6.

PMID: 39525268 PMC: 11546072. DOI: 10.5334/ijic.7600.


Assessing health technology implementation during academic research and early-stage development: support tools for awareness and guidance: a review.

Roosink M, van Gemert-Pijnen L, Verdaasdonk R, Kelders S Front Digit Health. 2024; 6:1386998.

PMID: 39469424 PMC: 11513387. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2024.1386998.


References
1.
Veinot T, Mitchell H, Ancker J . Good intentions are not enough: how informatics interventions can worsen inequality. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018; 25(8):1080-1088. PMC: 7646885. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocy052. View

2.
Cohn S, Clinch M, Bunn C, Stronge P . Entangled complexity: why complex interventions are just not complicated enough. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013; 18(1):40-3. DOI: 10.1258/jhsrp.2012.012036. View

3.
Waterman H, Tillen D, Dickson R, de Koning K . Action research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment. Health Technol Assess. 2002; 5(23):iii-157. View

4.
Greenhalgh T, Ovseiko P, Fahy N, Shaw S, Kerr P, Rushforth A . Maximising value from a United Kingdom Biomedical Research Centre: study protocol. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017; 15(1):70. PMC: 5556344. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-017-0237-1. View

5.
Friedrich M . Dangers of Substandard or Falsified Medicines. JAMA. 2018; 319(3):219. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.21291. View