Table 1 Steps in the rapid assessment procedure process

Design

1. Iteratively worked with the program funder starting with kickoff meeting to establish program logic model, focus questions, and ensure evaluation products met stakeholder needs.

2. Incorporated implementation science frameworks a priori in the development of the field guide and analytic tools.

3. Selected the site visit team (3–4 researchers) to have varied methodological expertise and content knowledge. Carried out group training to align data collection techniques and practice using the field guide.

Data collection and analysis

4. Established rapport with site liaison via preparatory phone calls to gather background information. Gathered and analyzed existing datasets from site’s internal pre-post effectiveness evaluation and quality improvement projects in preparation for site visit. Carried out secondary analysis of site outcomes.

5. Visited site over 2 days for qualitative data collection. Visit began with presentation by site team, followed by formal and informal interviews, meetings, observations, and demonstrations in the ICU.

6. Through team discussion, sifted qualitative data from one source (e.g., interview/observation/meeting) into a chart developed from implementation frameworks. At the end of each day and on return to the office, triangulated data from the charts to develop themes.

Validation and reporting

7. Findings from each site visit were written up as a case summary in the two weeks following the visit. The first stage of the writing process was carried out by the qualitative lead (LMH) and was part of the analytic journey as findings from the secondary quantitative data analysis from the document review were written up alongside site visit findings. Any points of inconsistency or which needed clarification were discussed by the research team as a whole until consensus was achieved. The site summary was shared with the site for validation.