↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Where Do Models for Change Management, Improvement and Implementation Meet? A Systematic Review of the Applications of Change Management Models in Healthcare

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Healthcare Leadership, March 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#11 of 129)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
855 Mendeley
Title
Where Do Models for Change Management, Improvement and Implementation Meet? A Systematic Review of the Applications of Change Management Models in Healthcare
Published in
Journal of Healthcare Leadership, March 2021
DOI 10.2147/jhl.s289176
Pubmed ID
Authors

Reema Harrison, Sarah Fischer, Ramesh L Walpola, Ashfaq Chauhan, Temitope Babalola, Stephen Mears, Huong Le-Dao

Abstract

The increasing prioritisation of healthcare quality across the six domains of efficiency, safety, patient-centredness, effectiveness, timeliness and accessibility has given rise to accelerated change both in the uptake of initiatives and the realisation of their outcomes to meet external targets. Whilst a multitude of change management methodologies exist, their application in complex healthcare contexts remains unclear. Our review sought to establish the methodologies applied, and the nature and effectiveness of their application in the context of healthcare. A systematic review and narrative synthesis was undertaken. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts followed by the full-text articles that were potentially relevant against the inclusion criteria. An appraisal of methodological and reporting quality of the included studies was also conducted by two further reviewers. Thirty-eight studies were included that reported the use of 12 change management methodologies in healthcare contexts across 10 countries. The most commonly applied methodologies were Kotter's Model (19 studies) and Lewin's Model (11 studies). Change management methodologies were applied in projects at local ward or unit level (14), institutional level (12) and system or multi-system (6) levels. The remainder of the studies provided commentary on the success of change efforts that had not utilised a change methodology with reference to change management approaches. Change management methodologies were often used as guiding principle to underpin a change in complex healthcare contexts. The lack of prescription application of the change management methodologies was identified. Change management methodologies were valued for providing guiding principles for change that are well suited to enable methodologies to be applied in the context of complex and unique healthcare contexts, and to be used in synergy with implementation and improvement methodologies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 855 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 855 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 105 12%
Student > Bachelor 89 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 4%
Student > Postgraduate 34 4%
Researcher 30 4%
Other 111 13%
Unknown 448 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 126 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 70 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 58 7%
Social Sciences 28 3%
Unspecified 22 3%
Other 100 12%
Unknown 451 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,331,058
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Healthcare Leadership
#11
of 129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,153
of 452,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Healthcare Leadership
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,976 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them