Measures of organizational culture, organizational climate, and implementation climate in behavioral health: A systematic review.
Measures of organizational culture, organizational climate, and implementation climate in behavioral health: A systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/26334895211018862
复制
发表时间：
2021-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lewis, Cara C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Powell, Byron J.;Mettert, Kayne D.;Dorsey, Caitlin N.;Weiner, Bryan J.;Stanick, Cameo F.;Lengnick-Hall, Rebecca;Ehrhart, Mark G.;Aarons, Gregory A.;Barwick, Melanie A.;Damschroder, Laura J.;Lewis, Cara C.
关键词：
组织文化、组织氛围和实施氛围是影响循证实践实施的关键组织结构。然而，很少有系统的研究表明，是否有心理测量学上强有力的指标可以用来评估行为健康中的这些结构。这项系统审查确定并评估了实施研究综合框架(CFIR)和Ehrhart及同事定义的组织文化、组织氛围、实施氛围和相关子结构的测量的心理测量学特性。数据收集包括搜索字符串生成、标题和摘要筛选、全文审查、构思任务和所有已知经验用途的引文搜索。从心理测量学和语用证据评定量表(试卷)中提取与九个心理测量学标准相关的数据：内部一致性、收敛效度、区分效度、已知群体效度、预测效度、并发效度、结构效度、反应性和常模。为每个标准提取的数据被评为从−1(“差”)到4(“优”)的等级，并且每个测量被分配一个总分(最高可能分数 = 36)，这构成了对每个焦点结构的测量进行逐头比较的基础。我们确定了组织文化(n = 21)、组织氛围(n = 36)、实施氛围(n = 2)、变革紧张度(n = 2)、兼容性(n = 6)、相对优先级(n = 2)、组织激励和奖励(n = 3)、目标和反馈(n = 3)以及学习氛围(n = 2)的完整测量或相关子量表。心理测量学证据最常见的是内部一致性和常模。有关其他心理测量学特性的信息较少。不同类别的心理测量学特性的中位数评级从“差”到“好”不等。关于反应性或预测有效性的证据有限。虽然确定了几个有希望的措施，但与这些结构相关的总体测量状况很差。为了加强对这些结构如何影响实施研究和实践的理解，需要对变化敏感的措施，并对关键实施和临床结果进行预测。有必要进一步测试最有希望的测量方法，并有充足的机会为这些重要结构开发更多心理测量学上强大的测量方法。组织文化、组织氛围和实施氛围可在促进或阻碍循证做法的成功实施和维持方面发挥关键作用。要提高我们对这些背景因素如何独立或共同影响实施和临床结果的理解，需要可靠和有效的措施。以前的系统审查确定了影响实施的组织因素的衡量标准，但没有一项明确侧重于行为健康；仅侧重于组织文化、组织氛围和实施氛围；或评估了特定领域内衡量标准所有已知用途的证据基础，例如注重行为健康的实施努力。本研究的目的是识别和评估组织文化、组织氛围、实施氛围和相关亚结构的测量在行为健康重点实施研究中使用的心理测量学特性。我们确定了21项组织文化措施、36项组织气氛措施、2项实施气氛措施、2项变革紧张度措施、6项相容措施、2项相对优先措施、3项组织激励和奖励措施、3项目标和反馈措施以及2项学习气氛措施。确定了一些有希望的措施；然而，这些结构的总体测量状态很差。这项审查突出了需要改进的具体领域，并建议需要严格评估现有措施和制定新措施。
Organizational culture, organizational climate, and implementation climate are key organizational constructs that influence the implementation of evidence-based practices. However, there has been little systematic investigation of the availability of psychometrically strong measures that can be used to assess these constructs in behavioral health. This systematic review identified and assessed the psychometric properties of measures of organizational culture, organizational climate, implementation climate, and related subconstructs as defined by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Ehrhart and colleagues. Data collection involved search string generation, title and abstract screening, full-text review, construct assignment, and citation searches for all known empirical uses. Data relevant to nine psychometric criteria from the Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS) were extracted: internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminant validity, known-groups validity, predictive validity, concurrent validity, structural validity, responsiveness, and norms. Extracted data for each criterion were rated on a scale from −1 (“poor”) to 4 (“excellent”), and each measure was assigned a total score (highest possible score = 36) that formed the basis for head-to-head comparisons of measures for each focal construct. We identified full measures or relevant subscales of broader measures for organizational culture (n = 21), organizational climate (n = 36), implementation climate (n = 2), tension for change (n = 2), compatibility (n = 6), relative priority (n = 2), organizational incentives and rewards (n = 3), goals and feedback (n = 3), and learning climate (n = 2). Psychometric evidence was most frequently available for internal consistency and norms. Information about other psychometric properties was less available. Median ratings for psychometric properties across categories of measures ranged from “poor” to “good.” There was limited evidence of responsiveness or predictive validity. While several promising measures were identified, the overall state of measurement related to these constructs is poor. To enhance understanding of how these constructs influence implementation research and practice, measures that are sensitive to change and predictive of key implementation and clinical outcomes are required. There is a need for further testing of the most promising measures, and ample opportunity to develop additional psychometrically strong measures of these important constructs. Organizational culture, organizational climate, and implementation climate can play a critical role in facilitating or impeding the successful implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices. Advancing our understanding of how these contextual factors independently or collectively influence implementation and clinical outcomes requires measures that are reliable and valid. Previous systematic reviews identified measures of organizational factors that influence implementation, but none focused explicitly on behavioral health; focused solely on organizational culture, organizational climate, and implementation climate; or assessed the evidence base of all known uses of a measure within a given area, such as behavioral health–focused implementation efforts. The purpose of this study was to identify and assess the psychometric properties of measures of organizational culture, organizational climate, implementation climate, and related subconstructs that have been used in behavioral health-focused implementation research. We identified 21 measures of organizational culture, 36 measures of organizational climate, 2 measures of implementation climate, 2 measures of tension for change, 6 measures of compatibility, 2 measures of relative priority, 3 measures of organizational incentives and rewards, 3 measures of goals and feedback, and 2 measures of learning climate. Some promising measures were identified; however, the overall state of measurement across these constructs is poor. This review highlights specific areas for improvement and suggests the need to rigorously evaluate existing measures and develop new measures.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1186/1748-5908-4-50
发表时间：
2009-08-07
期刊：
Implementation science : IS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Damschroder LJ;Aron DC;Keith RE;Kirsh SR;Alexander JA;Lowery JC
通讯作者：
Lowery JC
影响因子：
7.2
作者：
Cook, Joan M.;O'Donnell, Casey;Schnurr, Paula P.
通讯作者：
Schnurr, Paula P.
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Albers, Bianca;Metz, Allison;Burke, Katie
通讯作者：
Burke, Katie
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Dark F;Whiteford H;Ashkanasy NM;Harvey C;Crompton D;Newman E
通讯作者：
Newman E
影响因子：
7.2
作者：
Beidas, Rinad S.;Williams, Nathaniel J.;Mandell, David S.
通讯作者：
Mandell, David S.