1
|
Shahmoradi L, Safdari R, Ahmadi H, Zahmatkeshan M. Clinical decision support systems-based interventions to improve medication outcomes: A systematic literature review on features and effects. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2021; 35:27. [PMID: 34169039 PMCID: PMC8214039 DOI: 10.47176/mjiri.35.27] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2019] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) interventions were used to improve the life quality and safety in patients and also to improve practitioner performance, especially in the field of medication. Therefore, the aim of the paper was to summarize the available evidence on the impact, outcomes and significant factors on the implementation of CDSS in the field of medicine. Methods: This study is a systematic literature review. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and ProQuest were investigated by 15 February 2017. The inclusion requirements were met by 98 papers, from which 13 had described important factors in the implementation of CDSS, and 86 were medicated-related. We categorized the system in terms of its correlation with medication in which a system was implemented, and our intended results were examined. In this study, the process outcomes (such as; prescription, drug-drug interaction, drug adherence, etc.), patient outcomes, and significant factors affecting the implementation of CDSS were reviewed. Results: We found evidence that the use of medication-related CDSS improves clinical outcomes. Also, significant results were obtained regarding the reduction of prescription errors, and the improvement in quality and safety of medication prescribed. Conclusion: The results of this study show that, although computer systems such as CDSS may cause errors, in most cases, it has helped to improve prescribing, reduce side effects and drug interactions, and improve patient safety. Although these systems have improved the performance of practitioners and processes, there has not been much research on the impact of these systems on patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leila Shahmoradi
- Health Information Management Department, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Reza Safdari
- Health Information Management Department, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hossein Ahmadi
- OIM Department, Aston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham B4 7ET, United Kingdom
| | - Maryam Zahmatkeshan
- Noncommunicable Diseases Research Center, School of Medicine, Fasa University of Medical Sciences, Fasa, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Brereton R, Gerdtz M. Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) Education for Hospital Staff: An Integrative Literature Review. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2017; 38:42-60. [PMID: 27960576 DOI: 10.1080/01612840.2016.1248876] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) education amongst hospital staff is often inadequate. This leads to suboptimal care of patients and is a missed opportunity for early identification and treatment. This integrative review evaluates the core features of current education for hospital-based doctors and nurses in AOD, including country of origin, content, duration, and pedagogy. The majority of included studies were conducted in the USA (72%), target alcohol rather than AOD in general (72%), adopted a purely medical model of treatment (94%), and utilised a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) model (94%). The overall quality of the studies was weak-moderate, which led to small effect sizes in most studies and limits the generalizability of any conclusions. More high quality research trials are needed to establish the core features of effective AOD education for hospital staff. Future research should include a focus on the psychosocial context of addiction, other drug use and the impact of negative attitudes on care delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marie Gerdtz
- b School of Nursing, University of Melbourne , Melbourne , Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tzortziou Brown V, Underwood M, Mohamed N, Westwood O, Morrissey D. Professional interventions for general practitioners on the management of musculoskeletal conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2016:CD007495. [PMID: 27150167 PMCID: PMC10523188 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd007495.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Musculoskeletal conditions require particular management skills. Identification of interventions which are effective in equipping general practitioners (GPs) with such necessary skills could translate to improved health outcomes for patients and reduced healthcare and societal costs. OBJECTIVES To determine the effectiveness of professional interventions for GPs that aim to improve the management of musculoskeletal conditions in primary care. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2010, Issue 2; MEDLINE, Ovid (1950 - October 2013); EMBASE, Ovid (1980 - Ocotber 2013); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980 - November 2013), and the EPOC Specialised Register. We conducted cited reference searches using ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar; and handsearched selected issues of Arthritis and Rheumatism and Primary Care-Clinics in Office Practice. The latest search was conducted in November 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies of professional interventions for GPs, taking place in a community setting, aiming to improve the management (including diagnosis and treatment) of musculoskeletal conditions and reporting any objective measure of GP behaviour, patient or economic outcomes. We considered professional interventions of any length, duration, intensity and complexity compared with active or inactive controls. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently abstracted all data. We calculated the risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR) of compliance with desired practice for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes. We investigated whether the direction of the targeted behavioural change affects the effectiveness of interventions. MAIN RESULTS Thirty studies met our inclusion criteria.From 11 studies on osteoporosis, meta-analysis of five studies (high-certainty evidence) showed that a combination of a GP alerting system on a patient's increased risk of osteoporosis and a patient-directed intervention (including patient education and a reminder to see their GP) improves GP behaviour with regard to diagnostic bone mineral density (BMD) testing and osteoporosis medication prescribing (RR 4.44; (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.54 to 5.55; 3 studies; 3,386 participants)) for BMD and RR 1.71 (95% CI 1.50 to 1.94; 5 studies; 4,223 participants) for osteoporosis medication. Meta-analysis of two studies showed that GP alerting on its own also probably improves osteoporosis guideline-consistent GP behaviour (RR 4.75 (95% CI 3.62 to 6.24; 3,047 participants)) for BMD and RR 1.52 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.84; 3.047 participants) for osteoporosis medication) and that adding the patient-directed component probably does not lead to a greater effect (RR 0.94 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 2,995 participants)) for BMD and RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.10; 2,995 participants) for osteoporosis medication.Of the 10 studies on low back pain, seven showed that guideline dissemination and educational opportunities for GPs may lead to little or no improvement with regard to guideline-consistent GP behaviour. Two studies showed that the combination of guidelines and GP feedback on the total number of investigations requested may have an effect on GP behaviour and result in a slight reduction in the number of tests, while one of these studies showed that the combination of guidelines and GP reminders attached to radiology reports may result in a small but sustained reduction in the number of investigation requests.Of the four studies on osteoarthritis, one study showed that using educationally influential physicians may result in improvement in guideline-consistent GP behaviour. Another study showed slight improvements in patient outcomes (pain control) after training GPs on pain management.Of three studies on shoulder pain, one study reported that there may be little or no improvement in patient outcomes (functional capacity) after GP education on shoulder pain and injection training.Of two studies on other musculoskeletal conditions, one study on pain management showed that there may be worse patient outcomes (pain control) after GP training on the use of validated assessment scales.The 12 remaining studies across all musculoskeletal conditions showed little or no improvement in GP behaviour and patient outcomes.The direction of the targeted behaviour (i.e. increasing or decreasing a behaviour) does not seem to affect the effectiveness of an intervention. The majority of the studies did not investigate the potential adverse effects of the interventions and only three studies included a cost-effectiveness analysis.Overall, there were important methodological limitations in the body of evidence, with just a third of the studies reporting adequate allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessments. While our confidence in the pooled effect estimate of interventions for improving diagnostic testing and medication prescribing in osteoporosis is high, our confidence in the reported effect estimates in the remaining studies is low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is good-quality evidence that a GP alerting system with or without patient-directed education on osteoporosis improves guideline-consistent GP behaviour, resulting in better diagnosis and treatment rates.Interventions such as GP reminder messages and GP feedback on performance combined with guideline dissemination may lead to small improvements in guideline-consistent GP behaviour with regard to low back pain, while GP education on osteoarthritis pain and the use of educationally influential physicians may lead to slight improvement in patient outcomes and guideline-consistent behaviour respectively. However, further studies are needed to ascertain the effectiveness of such interventions in improving GP behaviour and patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria Tzortziou Brown
- Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry.Centre for Primary Care and Public HealthLondonUK
- Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of LondonCentre for Sports and Exercise Medicine, William Harvey Research Institute,LondonUKE1 4DG
| | - Martin Underwood
- Warwick Medical SchoolWarwick Clinical Trials UnitCoventryWarwickshireUKCV4 7AL
| | | | - Olwyn Westwood
- Warwick Medical School, The University of WarwickGibbet Hall CampusCoventryUKCV4 7AL
| | - Dylan Morrissey
- Queen Mary University of LondonSport and Exercise MedicineLondonUK
- Barts Health NHS TrustPhysiotherapy DepartmentLondonUK
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong BN, Dziedzic K, Treweek S, Eldridge S, Everitt H, Kennedy A, Qureshi N, Rogers A, Peacock R, Murray E. Achieving change in primary care--effectiveness of strategies for improving implementation of complex interventions: systematic review of reviews. BMJ Open 2015; 5:e009993. [PMID: 26700290 PMCID: PMC4691771 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009993] [Citation(s) in RCA: 135] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify, summarise and synthesise available literature on the effectiveness of implementation strategies for optimising implementation of complex interventions in primary care. DESIGN Systematic review of reviews. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO were searched, from first publication until December 2013; the bibliographies of relevant articles were screened for additional reports. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES Eligible reviews had to (1) examine effectiveness of single or multifaceted implementation strategies, (2) measure health professional practice or process outcomes and (3) include studies from predominantly primary care in developed countries. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text articles of potentially eligible reviews for inclusion. DATA SYNTHESIS Extracted data were synthesised using a narrative approach. RESULTS 91 reviews were included. The most commonly evaluated strategies were those targeted at the level of individual professionals, rather than those targeting organisations or context. These strategies (eg, audit and feedback, educational meetings, educational outreach, reminders) on their own demonstrated a small to modest improvement (2-9%) in professional practice or behaviour with considerable variability in the observed effects. The effects of multifaceted strategies targeted at professionals were mixed and not necessarily more effective than single strategies alone. There was relatively little review evidence on implementation strategies at the levels of organisation and wider context. Evidence on cost-effectiveness was limited and data on costs of different strategies were scarce and/or of low quality. CONCLUSIONS There is a substantial literature on implementation strategies aimed at changing professional practices or behaviour. It remains unclear which implementation strategies are more likely to be effective than others and under what conditions. Future research should focus on identifying and assessing the effectiveness of strategies targeted at the wider context and organisational levels and examining the costs and cost-effectiveness of implementation strategies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42014009410.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosa Lau
- eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Fiona Stevenson
- eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Bie Nio Ong
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care Sciences and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Krysia Dziedzic
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care Sciences and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Shaun Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
| | - Sandra Eldridge
- Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Hazel Everitt
- Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton,UK
| | - Anne Kennedy
- Faculty of Health Sciences, NIHR CLAHRC Wessex, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Nadeem Qureshi
- Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Derby, UK
| | - Anne Rogers
- Faculty of Health Sciences, NIHR CLAHRC Wessex, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | | | - Elizabeth Murray
- eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Harris MF, Lloyd J, Litt J, van Driel M, Mazza D, Russell G, Smith J, Del Mar C, Denney-Wilson E, Parker S, Krastev Y, Jayasinghe UW, Taylor R, Zwar N, Wilson J, Bolger-Harris H, Waters J. Preventive evidence into practice (PEP) study: implementation of guidelines to prevent primary vascular disease in general practice protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial. Implement Sci 2013; 8:8. [PMID: 23327664 PMCID: PMC3564812 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2012] [Accepted: 01/11/2013] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are significant gaps in the implementation and uptake of evidence-based guideline recommendations for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes in Australian general practice. This study protocol describes the methodology for a cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a model that aims to improve the implementation of these guidelines in Australian general practice developed by a collaboration between researchers, non-government organisations, and the profession. METHODS We hypothesise that the intervention will alter the behaviour of clinicians and patients resulting in improvements of recording of lifestyle and physiological risk factors (by 20%) and increased adherence to guideline recommendations for: the management of CVD and diabetes risk factors (by 20%); and lifestyle and physiological risk factors of patients at risk (by 5%). Thirty-two general practices will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation to receive either the intervention or continue with usual care, after stratification by state. The intervention will be delivered through: small group education; audit of patient records to determine preventive care; and practice facilitation visits adapted to the needs of the practices. Outcome data will be extracted from electronic medical records and patient questionnaires, and qualitative evaluation from provider and patient interviews. DISCUSSION We plan to disseminate study findings widely and directly inform implementation strategies by governments, professional bodies, and non-government organisations including the partner organisations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark F Harris
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | - Jane Lloyd
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | - John Litt
- Discipline of General Practice, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Mieke van Driel
- Discipline of General Practice, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia
| | - Danielle Mazza
- School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Grant Russell
- School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jane Smith
- Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Robina, QLD, Australia
| | - Chris Del Mar
- Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Robina, QLD, Australia
| | | | - Sharon Parker
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | - Yordanka Krastev
- Ethics Secretariate, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, 2007, Australia
| | - Upali W Jayasinghe
- Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | - Richard Taylor
- School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | - Nick Zwar
- School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | - Jinty Wilson
- National Heart Foundation of Australia, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Cheung A, Weir M, Mayhew A, Kozloff N, Brown K, Grimshaw J. Overview of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of reminders in improving healthcare professional behavior. Syst Rev 2012; 1:36. [PMID: 22898173 PMCID: PMC3503870 DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-36] [Citation(s) in RCA: 74] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2012] [Accepted: 07/04/2012] [Indexed: 03/20/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this project was to conduct an overview of existing systematic reviews to evaluate the effectiveness of reminders in changing professional behavior in clinical settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS Relevant systematic reviews of reminder interventions were identified through searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE and the Cochrane Library in conjunction with a larger project examining professional behavioral change interventions. Reviews were appraised using AMSTAR, a validated tool for assessing the quality of systematic reviews. As most reviews only reported vote counting, conclusions about effectiveness for each review were based on a count of positive studies. If available, we also report effect sizes. Conclusions were based on the findings from higher quality and current systematic reviews. RESULTS Thirty-five reviews were eligible for inclusion in this overview. Ten reviews examined the effectiveness of reminders generally, 5 reviews focused on specific health care settings, 14 reviews concentrated on specific behaviors and 6 reviews addressed specific patient populations. The quality of the reviews was variable (median = 3, range = 1 to 8). Seven reviews had AMSTAR scores >5 and were considered in detail. Five of these seven reviews demonstrated positive effects of reminders in changing provider behavior. Few reviews used quantitative pooling methods; in one high quality and current review, the overall observed effects were moderate with an absolute median improvement in performance of 4.2% (IQR: 0.5% to 6.6%). DISCUSSION The results support that modest improvements can occur with the use of reminders. The effect size is consistent with other interventions that have been used to improve professional behavior. CONCLUSION Reminders appear effective in improving different clinical behaviors across a range of settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy Cheung
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, 33 Russell St,, 3rd Floor Tower, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kennedy CC, Ioannidis G, Giangregorio LM, Adachi JD, Thabane L, Morin SN, Crilly RG, Marr S, Josse RG, Lohfeld L, Pickard LE, King S, van der Horst ML, Campbell G, Stroud J, Dolovich L, Sawka AM, Jain R, Nash L, Papaioannou A. An interdisciplinary knowledge translation intervention in long-term care: study protocol for the vitamin D and osteoporosis study (ViDOS) pilot cluster randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci 2012; 7:48. [PMID: 22624776 PMCID: PMC3533817 DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-48] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2012] [Accepted: 05/24/2012] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Knowledge translation (KT) research in long-term care (LTC) is still in its early stages. This protocol describes the evaluation of a multifaceted, interdisciplinary KT intervention aimed at integrating evidence-based osteoporosis and fracture prevention strategies into LTC care processes. METHODS AND DESIGN The Vitamin D and Osteoporosis Study (ViDOS) is underway in 40 LTC homes (n = 19 intervention, n = 21 control) across Ontario, Canada. The primary objectives of this study are to assess the feasibility of delivering the KT intervention, and clinically, to increase the percent of LTC residents prescribed ≥800 IU of vitamin D daily. Eligibility criteria are LTC homes that are serviced by our partner pharmacy provider and have more than one prescribing physician. The target audience within each LTC home is the Professional Advisory Committee (PAC), an interdisciplinary team who meets quarterly. The key elements of the intervention are three interactive educational sessions led by an expert opinion leader, action planning using a quality improvement cycle, audit and feedback reports, nominated internal champions, and reminders/point-of-care tools. Control homes do not receive any intervention, however both intervention and control homes received educational materials as part of the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy. Primary outcomes are feasibility measures (recruitment, retention, attendance at educational sessions, action plan items identified and initiated, internal champions identified, performance reports provided and reviewed), and vitamin D (≥800 IU/daily) prescribing at 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of residents prescribed calcium supplements and osteoporosis medications, and falls and fractures. Qualitative methods will examine the experience of the LTC team with the KT intervention. Homes are centrally randomized to intervention and control groups in blocks of variable size using a computer generated allocation sequence. Randomization is stratified by home size and profit/nonprofit status. Prescribing data retrieval and analysis are performed by blinded personnel. DISCUSSION Our study will contribute to an improved understanding of the feasibility and acceptability of a multifaceted intervention aimed at translating knowledge to LTC practitioners. Lessons learned from this study will be valuable in guiding future research and understanding the complexities of translating knowledge in LTC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Courtney C Kennedy
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Hamilton Health Sciences - St. Peter's Hospital, Juravinski Research Centre, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario L8M 1W9, Canada
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada
| | - George Ioannidis
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Charlton Medical Centre, 25 Charlton Ave East, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 1Y2, Canada
| | - Lora M Giangregorio
- Department of Kinesiology, Faculty of Applied Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada
| | - Jonathan D Adachi
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Charlton Medical Centre, 25 Charlton Ave East, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 1Y2, Canada
| | - Lehana Thabane
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada
| | - Suzanne N Morin
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, MUHC-Montreal General Hospital, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, QC, H3G 1A4, Canada
| | - Richard G Crilly
- Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, Parkwood Hospital, 801 Commissioners Rd. East, London, Ontario, N6C 5J1, Canada
| | - Sharon Marr
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Hamilton Health Sciences - St. Peter's Hospital, Juravinski Research Centre, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario L8M 1W9, Canada
| | - Robert G Josse
- Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Toronto, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lynne Lohfeld
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada
| | - Laura E Pickard
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Hamilton Health Sciences - St. Peter's Hospital, Juravinski Research Centre, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario L8M 1W9, Canada
| | - Susanne King
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Hamilton Health Sciences - St. Peter's Hospital, Juravinski Research Centre, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario L8M 1W9, Canada
| | - Mary-Lou van der Horst
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Hamilton Health Sciences - St. Peter's Hospital, Juravinski Research Centre, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario L8M 1W9, Canada
| | - Glenda Campbell
- Medical Pharmacies Group Limited, 590 Granite Court, Pickering, Ontario, L1W 3X6, Canada
| | - Jackie Stroud
- Medical Pharmacies Group Limited, 590 Granite Court, Pickering, Ontario, L1W 3X6, Canada
| | - Lisa Dolovich
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Road South, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 0A1, Canada
| | - Anna M Sawka
- Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2C4, Canada
| | - Ravi Jain
- Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy, Osteoporosis Canada, 1090 Don Mills Road, Suite 301, Toronto, Ontario, M3C 3R6, Canada
| | - Lynn Nash
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Road South, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 0A1, Canada
| | - Alexandra Papaioannou
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
- Hamilton Health Sciences - St. Peter's Hospital, Juravinski Research Centre, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario L8M 1W9, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Boaz A, Baeza J, Fraser A. Effective implementation of research into practice: an overview of systematic reviews of the health literature. BMC Res Notes 2011; 4:212. [PMID: 21696585 PMCID: PMC3148986 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 155] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2011] [Accepted: 06/22/2011] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of interventions has been developed to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice. FINDINGS A review of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase the use of research in clinical practice. A search for relevant systematic reviews was conducted of Medline and the Cochrane Database of Reviews 1998-2009. 13 systematic reviews containing 313 primary studies were included. Four strategy types are identified: audit and feedback; computerised decision support; opinion leaders; and multifaceted interventions. Nine of the reviews reported on multifaceted interventions. This review highlights the small effects of single interventions such as audit and feedback, computerised decision support and opinion leaders. Systematic reviews of multifaceted interventions claim an improvement in effectiveness over single interventions, with effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. This review found that a number of published systematic reviews fail to state whether the recommended practice change is based on the best available research evidence. CONCLUSIONS This overview of systematic reviews updates the body of knowledge relating to the effectiveness of key mechanisms for improving clinical practice and service development. Multifaceted interventions are more likely to improve practice than single interventions such as audit and feedback. This review identified a small literature focusing explicitly on getting research evidence into clinical practice. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring that primary studies and systematic reviews are precise about the extent to which the reported interventions focus on changing practice based on research evidence (as opposed to other information codified in guidelines and education materials).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annette Boaz
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, 7th Floor, Capital House, 42 Weston Street, London SE1 3QD, UK
| | - Juan Baeza
- Department of Management, School of Social Science and Public Policy, King's College London, Franklin-Wilkins Building, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK
| | - Alec Fraser
- Department of Management, School of Social Science and Public Policy, King's College London, Franklin-Wilkins Building, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK
| |
Collapse
|