Translating knowledge into action: Information needs of decision-makers in healthcare

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the healthcare information needs of decision-makers in a local US healthcare setting in efforts to promote the translation of knowledge into action. The focus was on the perceptions and preferences of decision-makers regarding usable information in making decisions as to identify strategies to maximize the contribution of healthcare findings to policy and practice. Methods: This study utilized a qualitative data collection and analysis strategy. Data was collected via open-ended key-informant interviews from a sample of 37 public and private-sector healthcare decision-makers in the Houston/Harris County safety net. The sample was comprised of high-level decision-makers, including legislators, executive managers, service providers, and healthcare funders. Decision-makers were asked to identify the types of information, the level of collaboration with outside agencies, useful attributes of information, and the sources, formats/styles, and modes of information preferred in making important decisions and the basis for their preferences. Results: Decision-makers report acquiring information, categorizing information as usable knowledge, and selecting information for use based on the application of four cross-cutting thought processes or cognitive frameworks. In order of apparent preference, these are time orientation, followed by information seeking directionality, selection of validation processes, and centrality of credibility/reliability. In applying the frameworks, decision-makers are influenced by numerous factors associated with their perceptions of the utility of information and the importance of collaboration with outside agencies in making decisions as well as professional and organizational characteristics. Conclusion: An approach based on the elucidated cognitive framework may be valuable in identifying the reported contextual determinants of information use by decision-makers in US healthcare settings. Such an approach can facilitate active producer/user collaborations and promote the production of mutually valued, comprehensible, and usable findings leading to sustainable knowledge translation efforts long-term.^

Barriers to cross-border research projects: A prelude to improving professional collaborations between the United States and Mexico

Study objective. This was a secondary data analysis of a study designed and executed in two phases in order to investigate several questions: Why aren't more investigators conducting successful cross-border research on human health issues? What are the barriers to conducting this research? What interventions might facilitate cross-border research? ^ Methods. Key informant interviews and focus groups were used in Phase One, and structured questionnaires in Phase Two. A multi-question survey was created based on the findings of focus groups and distributed to a wider circle of researchers and academics for completion. The data was entered and analyzed using SPSS software. ^ Setting. El Paso, TX located on the U.S-Mexico Border. ^ Participants. Individuals from local academic institutions and the State Department of Health. ^ Results. From the transcribed data of the focus groups, eight major themes emerged: Political Barriers, Language/Cultural Barriers, Differing Goals, Geographic Issues, Legal Barriers, Technology/Material Issues, Financial Barriers, and Trust Issues. Using these themes, the questionnaire was created. ^ The response rate for the questionnaires was 47%. The largest obstacles revealed by this study were identifying a funding source for the project (47% agreeing or strongly agreeing), difficulties paying a foreign counterpart (33% agreeing or strongly agreeing) and administrative changes in Mexico (31% agreeing or strongly agreeing). ^ Conclusions. Many U.S. investigators interested in cross-border research have been discouraged in their efforts by varying barriers. The majority of respondents in the survey felt financial issues and changes in Mexican governments were the most significant obstacles. While some of these barriers can be overcome simply by collaboration among motivated groups, other barriers may be more difficult to remove. Although more evaluation of this research question is warranted, the information obtained through this study is sufficient to support creation of a Cross-Border Research Resource Manual to be used by individuals interested in conducting research with Mexico. ^

Cost -effectiveness of services and treatments for ambulatory dually diagnosed CMHC clients: Implications for managed care

This paper reports a cost-effectiveness analysis of standard therapeutic interventions received by ambulatory dually diagnosed clients of a Community Mental Health Center (CMHC). For the purposes of this study dually diagnosed was defined as a DSM-III-R or IV diagnosis of a major mental disorder and a concomitant substance abuse disorder. The prevalence of dually diagnosed people among the mentally ill and their unique and problematic nature continues to challenge and encumber CMHCs and poses grave public health risks. An absence of research on these clients in community-based settings and the cost-effectiveness of their standard CMHC care has hindered the development of effective community-based intervention strategies. This exploratory and descriptive effort is a first step toward providing information on which to base programmatic management decisions.^ Data for this study were derived from electronic client records of a CMHC located in a large Southwestern, Sun-belt metropolitan area. A total of 220 records were collected on clients consecutively admitted during a two-and-one-half year period. Information was gathered profiling the clients' background characteristics, receipt of standard services and treatments, costs of the care they received, and length of CMHC enrollment and subsequent psychiatric hospitalizations. The services and treatments were compared with regard to their costs and predicted contributions toward maintaining clients in the community and out of public psychiatric hospitals.^ This study investigated: (1) the study groups' background, mental illness, and substance abuse characteristics; (2) types, extent, and patterns of their receipt of standard services and treatments; (3) associations between the receipt of services and treatments, community tenure, and risk of psychiatric hospitalization; and, (4) comparisons of average costs for services and treatments in terms of their contributions toward maintaining the clients in the community.^ The results suggest that substance abuse and other lifestyle factors were related to the dually diagnosed clients' admissions to the CMHC. The dually diagnosed clients' receipt of care was associated strongly with their insurability and global functioning. Medication Services were the most expensive yet effective service or treatment. Supported Education was the third most expensive and second most effective. Psychosocial Services, the second most expensive, were only effective in terms of maintaining clients in the community. Group Counseling, the fourth most expensive, had no effect on community maintenance and increased the risk of hospitalization when accompanied by Medication Services. Individual Counseling, the least expensive, had no effect on community maintenance. But it reduced the risk of hospitalization when accompanied by Medication Services. Networking/Referral, the fifth most expensive service or treatment, was ineffective.^ The study compared the results with findings in the literature. Implications are discussed regarding further research, study limitations, practical applications and benefits, and improvements to theoretical understandings, in particular, concepts underscoring Managed Care. ^