From theory to practice:Improving the impact of health services research

Background: While significant strides have been made in health research, the incorporation of research evidence into healthcare decision-making has been marginal. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of how the utility of health services research can be improved through the use of theory. Integrating theory into health services research can improve research methodology and encourage stronger collaboration with decision-makers. Discussion: Recognizing the importance of theory calls for new expectations in the practice of health services research. These include: the formation of interdisciplinary research teams; broadening the training for those who will practice health services research; and supportive organizational conditions that promote collaboration between researchers and decision makers. Further, funding bodies can provide a significant role in guiding and supporting the use of theory in the practice of health services research. Summary: Institutions and researchers should incorporate the use of theory if health services research is to fulfill its potential for improving the delivery of health care. © 2005 Brazil et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Collaborative practice:a strategy to improve the relevance of health services research.

Health services research has emerged as a tool for decision makers to make services more effective and efficient. While its value as a basis for decision making is well established, the incorporation of such evidence into decision making remains inconsistent. To this end, strengthening collaborative relationships between researchers and healthcare decision makers has been identified as a significant strategy for putting research evidence into practice.

Effects of a demand-led evidence briefing service on the uptake and use of research evidence by commissioners of health services: protocol for a controlled before and after study

Background: Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) are mandated to use research evidence effectively to ensure optimum use of resources by the National Health Service (NHS), both in accelerating innovation and in stopping the use of less effective practices and models of service delivery. We intend to evaluate whether access to a demand-led evidence service improves uptake and use of research evidence by NHS commissioners compared with less intensive and less targeted alternatives. 

Methods/design: This is a controlled before and after study involving CCGs in the North of England. Participating CCGs will receive one of three interventions to support the use of research evidence in their decision-making:1) consulting plus responsive push of tailored evidence; 2) consulting plus an unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence; or 3) standard service unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence. Our primary outcome will be changed at 12 months from baseline of a CCGs ability to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making. Secondary outcomes will measure individual clinical leads and managers’ intentions to use research evidence in decision making. Documentary evidence of the use of the outputs of the service will be sought. A process evaluation will evaluate the nature and success of the interactions both within the sites and between commissioners and researchers delivering the service. 

Discussion: The proposed research will generate new knowledge of direct relevance and value to the NHS. The findings will help to clarify which elements of the service are of value in promoting the use of research evidence.Those involved in NHS commissioning will be able to use the results to inform how best to build the infrastructure they need to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making and to fulfil their statutory duties under the Health and Social Care Act.

It's all about relationships:A qualitative study of health researchers' perspectives of conducting interdisciplinary health research

Background. Interdisciplinary research has been promoted as an optimal research paradigm in the health sciences, yet little is known about how researchers experience interdisciplinarity in practice. This study sought to determine how interdisciplinary research was conceptualized and operationalized from the researcher's perspective and to better understand how best to facilitate interdisciplinary research success. Methods. Key informant interviews were conducted with health researchers with expertise or experience in conducting interdisciplinary research. Interviews were completed either in person or over the telephone using a semi-structured interview guide. Data collection occurred simultaneously with data analysis so that emerging themes could be explored in subsequent interviews. A content analysis approach was used. Results. Nineteen researchers took part in this study. Interdisciplinary research was conceptualized disparately between participants, and there was modest attention towards operationalization of interdisciplinary research. There was one overriding theme, "It's all about relationships", that emerged from the data. Within this theme, there were four related subthemes: 1) Involvement in interdisciplinary research; 2) Why do I do interdisciplinary research?; 3) Managing and fostering interdisciplinary relationships; and 4) The prickly side to interdisciplinary research. Together, these themes suggest that the choice to conduct interdisciplinary research, though often driven by the research question, is highly influenced by interpersonal and relationship-related factors. In addition, researchers preferred to engage in interdisciplinary research with those that they had already established relationships and where their role in the research process was clearly articulated. A focus on relationship building was seen as a strong facilitator of interdisciplinary success. Conclusion. Many health researchers experienced mixed reactions towards their involvement in interdisciplinary research. A well thought-out rationale for interdisciplinary research, and strategies to utilize the contribution of each researcher involved were seen as facilitators towards maximizing the benefits that could be derived from interdisciplinary research. © 2008 Nair et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

An international comparison of legal frameworks for supported and substitute decision-making in mental health services

There have been important recent developments in law, research, policy and practice relating to supporting people with decision-making impairments, in particular when a person’s wishes and preferences are unclear or inaccessible. A driver in this respect is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD); the implications of the CRPD for policy and professional practices are currently debated. This article reviews and compares four legal frameworks for supported and substitute decision-making for people whose decision-making ability is impaired. In particular, it explores how these frameworks may apply to people with mental health problems. The four jurisdictions are: Ontario, Canada; Victoria, Australia; England and Wales, United Kingdom (UK); and Northern Ireland, UK. Comparisons and contrasts are made in the key areas of: the legal framework for supported and substitute decision-making; the criteria for intervention; the assessment process; the safeguards; and issues in practice. Thus Ontario has developed a relatively comprehensive, progressive and influential legal framework over the past thirty years but there remain concerns about the standardisation of decision-making ability assessments and how the laws work together. In Australia, the Victorian Law Reform Commission (2012) has recommended that the six different types of substitute decision-making under the three laws in that jurisdiction, need to be simplified, and integrated into a spectrum that includes supported decision-making. In England and Wales the Mental Capacity Act 2005 has a complex interface with mental health law. In Northern Ireland it is proposed to introduce a new Mental Capacity (Health, Welfare and Finance) Bill that will provide a unified structure for all substitute decision-making. The discussion will consider the key strengths and limitations of the approaches in each jurisdiction and identify possible ways that further progress can be made in law, policy and practice.

Assessment Work of Paramedics on the Front lines of Emergency Health Services

This article draws on an institutional ethnographic inquiry into the work of paramedics and the institutional setting that organizes and coordinates their work processes. Drawing on over 200 hours of observations and over 100 interviews with paramedics (average length of 18 minutes) and other emergency medical personnel, this article explores the standard and not so standard work of paramedics as they assess and care for their patients on the front lines of emergency health services. More specifically, I focus on the multiplicity of interfacing social, demographic, locational, situational, and institutional factors that shape and organize the work of paramedics. In doing so, this article provides insights into how paramedics orient to the social context in which their work occurs and contrasts this actual work with how their work is institutionally reported and made visible; what gets counted institutionally is not necessarily the same as what counts for the paramedics. This article problematizes this demarcation between what is known institutionally and “systematic practices of ‘not knowing’” (DeVault, 2008, p. 290).

Improving allied health professionals' research implementation behaviours for children with cerebral palsy: protocol for a before-after study

BACKGROUND: Cerebral palsy is a permanent disorder of posture and movement caused by disturbances in the developing brain. It affects approximately 1 in every 500 children in developed countries and is the most common form of childhood physical disability. People with cerebral palsy may also have problems with speech, vision and hearing, intellectual difficulties and epilepsy. Health and therapy services are frequently required throughout life, and this care should be effective and evidence informed; however, accessing and adopting new research findings into day-to-day clinical practice is often delayed.

METHODS/DESIGN: This 3-year study employs a before and after design to evaluate if a multi-strategy intervention can improve research implementation among allied health professionals (AHPs) who work with children and young people with cerebral palsy and to establish if children's health outcomes can be improved by routine clinical assessment. The intervention comprises (1) knowledge brokering with AHPs, (2) access to an online research evidence library, (3) provision of negotiated evidence-based training and education, and (4) routine use of evidence-based measures with children and young people aged 3-18 years with cerebral palsy. The study is being implemented in four organisations, with a fifth organisation acting as a comparison site, across four Australian states. Effectiveness will be assessed using questionnaires completed by AHPs at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months, and by monitoring the extent of use of evidence-based measures. Children's health outcomes will be evaluated by longitudinal analyses.

DISCUSSION: Government, policy makers and service providers all seek evidence-based information to support decision-making about how to distribute scarce resources, and families are seeking information to support intervention choices. This study will provide knowledge about what constitutes an efficient, evidence-informed service and which allied health interventions are implemented for children with cerebral palsy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial is not a controlled healthcare intervention and is not registered.

The contribution of qualitative research in designing a complex intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in two different healthcare systems

Background: Developing complex interventions for testing in randomised controlled trials is of increasing importance in healthcare planning. There is a need for careful design of interventions for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD). It has been suggested that integrating qualitative research in the development of a complex intervention may contribute to optimising its design but there is limited evidence of this in practice. This study aims to examine the contribution of qualitative research in developing a complex intervention to improve the provision and uptake of secondary prevention of CHD within primary care in two different healthcare systems.

Methods: In four general practices, one rural and one urban, in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, patients with CHD were purposively selected. Four focus groups with patients (N = 23) and four with staff (N = 29) informed the development of the intervention by exploring how it could be tailored and integrated with current secondary prevention activities for CHD in the two healthcare settings. Following an exploratory trial the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention were discussed in four focus groups (17 patients) and 10 interviews (staff). The data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: Integrating qualitative research into the development of the intervention provided depth of information about the varying impact, between the two healthcare systems, of different funding and administrative arrangements, on their provision of secondary prevention and identified similar barriers of time constraints, training needs and poor patient motivation. The findings also highlighted the importance to patients of stress management, the need for which had been underestimated by the researchers. The qualitative evaluation provided depth of detail not found in evaluation questionnaires. It highlighted how the intervention needed to be more practical by minimising administration, integrating role plays into behaviour change training, providing more practical information about stress management and removing self-monitoring of lifestyle change.

Conclusion: Qualitative research is integral to developing the design detail of a complex intervention and tailoring its components to address individuals' needs in different healthcare systems. The findings highlight how qualitative research may be a valuable component of the preparation for complex interventions and their evaluation.