Implementation Science: Ensuring the Return on Our Research Investment

Behavioral Science: Enhancing Our Approach to the Development of Effective Additional Risk Minimization Strategies

Additional risk minimization strategies may be required to assure a positive benefit-risk balance for some therapeutic products associated with serious adverse drug reactions/risks of use, without which these products may be otherwise unavailable to patients. The goals of risk minimization strategies are often fundamentally to influence the behavior of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and/or patients and can include appropriate patient selection, provision of education and counselling, appropriate medication use, adverse drug reaction monitoring, and adoption of other elements to assure safe use, such as pregnancy prevention. Current approaches to additional risk minimization strategy development rely heavily on information provision, without full consideration of the contextual factors and multi-level influences on patient and HCP behaviors that impact adoption and long-term adherence to these interventions. Application of evidence-based behavioral science methods are urgently needed to improve the quality and effectiveness of these strategies. Evidence from the fields of adherence, health promotion, and drug utilization research underscores the value and necessity for using established behavioral science frameworks and methods if we are to achieve clinical safety goals for patients. The current paper aims to enhance additional risk minimization strategy development and effectiveness by considering how a behavioral science approach can be applied, drawing from evidence in understanding of engagement with pharmaceutical medicines as well as wider public health interventions for patients and HCPs.

Conducting Implementation Research in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Case Example and Considerations for Study Design

As neurorehabilitation research continues to grow, the field must ensure its scientific discoveries are implemented into routine clinical care. Without targeted efforts to increase the implementation of evidence into practice, patients may never see the benefits of interventions, assessments, and technologies developed in the confines of empirical studies. This article serves as a response to Lynch et al's 2018 Point of View piece in Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair that underscored the urgent need for implementation studies to expedite the application of neurorehabilitation evidence in practice. To address this need, we provide the following 4 considerations investigators should contemplate when designing their own studies at the intersection of implementation and neurorehabilitation research: (a) consideration of guiding theories, models, and frameworks, (b) consideration of implementation strategies, (c) considerations of target outcomes, and (d) consideration of hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs. To conclude, we also provide a study exemplar to depict how these considerations can be integrated into the neurorehabilitation research field to narrow the evidence-to-practice gap.