Supporting the evaluation and implementation of musculoskeletal models of care: A globally informed framework for judging readiness and success

Andrew M. Briggs, Joanne E. Jordan, Matthew Jennings, Robyn Speerin, Peter Bragge, Jason Chua, Anthony D. Woolf, Helen Slater

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Objective: To develop a globally informed framework to evaluate readiness for implementation and success after implementation of musculoskeletal models of care (MOCs). Methods: Three phases were undertaken: 1) a qualitative study with 27 Australian subject matter experts (SMEs) to develop a draft framework; 2) an eDelphi study with an international panel of 93 SMEs across 30 nations to evaluate face validity, and refine and establish consensus on the framework components; and 3) translation of the framework into a user-focused resource and evaluation of its acceptability with the eDelphi panel. Results: A comprehensive evaluation framework was developed for judging the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs. The framework consists of 9 domains, with each domain containing a number of themes underpinned by detailed elements. In the first Delphi round, scores of “partly agree” or “completely agree” with the draft framework ranged 96.7%–100%. In the second round, “essential” scores ranged 58.6%–98.9%, resulting in 14 of 34 themes being classified as essential. SMEs strongly agreed or agreed that the final framework was useful (98.8%), usable (95.1%), credible (100%) and appealing (93.9%). Overall, 96.3% strongly supported or supported the final structure of the framework as it was presented, while 100%, 96.3%, and 100% strongly supported or supported the content within the readiness, initiating implementation, and success streams, respectively. Conclusion: An empirically derived framework to evaluate the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs was strongly supported by an international panel of SMEs. The framework provides an important internationally applicable benchmark for the development, implementation, and evaluation of musculoskeletal MOCs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)567-577
Number of pages11
JournalArthritis Care and Research
Volume69
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Cite this

Briggs, Andrew M. ; Jordan, Joanne E. ; Jennings, Matthew ; Speerin, Robyn ; Bragge, Peter ; Chua, Jason ; Woolf, Anthony D. ; Slater, Helen. / Supporting the evaluation and implementation of musculoskeletal models of care : A globally informed framework for judging readiness and success. In: Arthritis Care and Research. 2017 ; Vol. 69, No. 4. pp. 567-577.
@article{3f95082823cc4a4387cb6a82c92ddbb7,
title = "Supporting the evaluation and implementation of musculoskeletal models of care: A globally informed framework for judging readiness and success",
abstract = "Objective: To develop a globally informed framework to evaluate readiness for implementation and success after implementation of musculoskeletal models of care (MOCs). Methods: Three phases were undertaken: 1) a qualitative study with 27 Australian subject matter experts (SMEs) to develop a draft framework; 2) an eDelphi study with an international panel of 93 SMEs across 30 nations to evaluate face validity, and refine and establish consensus on the framework components; and 3) translation of the framework into a user-focused resource and evaluation of its acceptability with the eDelphi panel. Results: A comprehensive evaluation framework was developed for judging the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs. The framework consists of 9 domains, with each domain containing a number of themes underpinned by detailed elements. In the first Delphi round, scores of “partly agree” or “completely agree” with the draft framework ranged 96.7{\%}–100{\%}. In the second round, “essential” scores ranged 58.6{\%}–98.9{\%}, resulting in 14 of 34 themes being classified as essential. SMEs strongly agreed or agreed that the final framework was useful (98.8{\%}), usable (95.1{\%}), credible (100{\%}) and appealing (93.9{\%}). Overall, 96.3{\%} strongly supported or supported the final structure of the framework as it was presented, while 100{\%}, 96.3{\%}, and 100{\%} strongly supported or supported the content within the readiness, initiating implementation, and success streams, respectively. Conclusion: An empirically derived framework to evaluate the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs was strongly supported by an international panel of SMEs. The framework provides an important internationally applicable benchmark for the development, implementation, and evaluation of musculoskeletal MOCs.",
author = "Briggs, {Andrew M.} and Jordan, {Joanne E.} and Matthew Jennings and Robyn Speerin and Peter Bragge and Jason Chua and Woolf, {Anthony D.} and Helen Slater",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1002/acr.22948",
language = "English",
volume = "69",
pages = "567--577",
journal = "Arthritis Care and Research",
issn = "2151-464X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

Supporting the evaluation and implementation of musculoskeletal models of care : A globally informed framework for judging readiness and success. / Briggs, Andrew M.; Jordan, Joanne E.; Jennings, Matthew; Speerin, Robyn; Bragge, Peter; Chua, Jason; Woolf, Anthony D.; Slater, Helen.

In: Arthritis Care and Research, Vol. 69, No. 4, 2017, p. 567-577.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Supporting the evaluation and implementation of musculoskeletal models of care

T2 - A globally informed framework for judging readiness and success

AU - Briggs, Andrew M.

AU - Jordan, Joanne E.

AU - Jennings, Matthew

AU - Speerin, Robyn

AU - Bragge, Peter

AU - Chua, Jason

AU - Woolf, Anthony D.

AU - Slater, Helen

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Objective: To develop a globally informed framework to evaluate readiness for implementation and success after implementation of musculoskeletal models of care (MOCs). Methods: Three phases were undertaken: 1) a qualitative study with 27 Australian subject matter experts (SMEs) to develop a draft framework; 2) an eDelphi study with an international panel of 93 SMEs across 30 nations to evaluate face validity, and refine and establish consensus on the framework components; and 3) translation of the framework into a user-focused resource and evaluation of its acceptability with the eDelphi panel. Results: A comprehensive evaluation framework was developed for judging the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs. The framework consists of 9 domains, with each domain containing a number of themes underpinned by detailed elements. In the first Delphi round, scores of “partly agree” or “completely agree” with the draft framework ranged 96.7%–100%. In the second round, “essential” scores ranged 58.6%–98.9%, resulting in 14 of 34 themes being classified as essential. SMEs strongly agreed or agreed that the final framework was useful (98.8%), usable (95.1%), credible (100%) and appealing (93.9%). Overall, 96.3% strongly supported or supported the final structure of the framework as it was presented, while 100%, 96.3%, and 100% strongly supported or supported the content within the readiness, initiating implementation, and success streams, respectively. Conclusion: An empirically derived framework to evaluate the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs was strongly supported by an international panel of SMEs. The framework provides an important internationally applicable benchmark for the development, implementation, and evaluation of musculoskeletal MOCs.

AB - Objective: To develop a globally informed framework to evaluate readiness for implementation and success after implementation of musculoskeletal models of care (MOCs). Methods: Three phases were undertaken: 1) a qualitative study with 27 Australian subject matter experts (SMEs) to develop a draft framework; 2) an eDelphi study with an international panel of 93 SMEs across 30 nations to evaluate face validity, and refine and establish consensus on the framework components; and 3) translation of the framework into a user-focused resource and evaluation of its acceptability with the eDelphi panel. Results: A comprehensive evaluation framework was developed for judging the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs. The framework consists of 9 domains, with each domain containing a number of themes underpinned by detailed elements. In the first Delphi round, scores of “partly agree” or “completely agree” with the draft framework ranged 96.7%–100%. In the second round, “essential” scores ranged 58.6%–98.9%, resulting in 14 of 34 themes being classified as essential. SMEs strongly agreed or agreed that the final framework was useful (98.8%), usable (95.1%), credible (100%) and appealing (93.9%). Overall, 96.3% strongly supported or supported the final structure of the framework as it was presented, while 100%, 96.3%, and 100% strongly supported or supported the content within the readiness, initiating implementation, and success streams, respectively. Conclusion: An empirically derived framework to evaluate the readiness and success of musculoskeletal MOCs was strongly supported by an international panel of SMEs. The framework provides an important internationally applicable benchmark for the development, implementation, and evaluation of musculoskeletal MOCs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016326655&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/acr.22948

DO - 10.1002/acr.22948

M3 - Article

VL - 69

SP - 567

EP - 577

JO - Arthritis Care and Research

JF - Arthritis Care and Research

SN - 2151-464X

IS - 4

ER -