Abstract: ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: 'Protocol based care' was envisioned by policy makers as a mechanism for delivering on the service improvement agenda in England. Realistic evaluation is an increasingly popular approach, but few published examples exist, particularly in implementation research. To fill this gap, within this paper we describe the application of a realistic evaluation approach to the study of protocol-based care, whilst sharing findings of relevance about standardising care through the use of protocols, guidelines, and pathways. METHODS: Situated between positivism and relativism, realistic evaluation is concerned with the identification of underlying causal mechanisms, how they work, and under what conditions. Fundamentally it focuses attention on finding out what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. RESULTS: In this research, we were interested in understanding the relationships between the type and nature of particular approaches to protocol-based care (mechanisms), within different clinical settings (context), and what impacts this resulted in (outcomes). An evidence review using the principles of realist synthesis resulted in a number of propositions, i.e., context, mechanism, and outcome threads (CMOs). These propositions were then 'tested' through multiple case studies, using multiple methods including non-participant observation, interviews, and document analysis through an iterative analysis process. The initial propositions (conjectured CMOs) only partially corresponded to the findings that emerged during analysis. From the iterative analysis process of scrutinising mechanisms, context, and outcomes we were able to draw out some theoretically generalisable features about what works, for whom, how, and what circumstances in relation to the use of standardised care approaches (refined CMOs). CONCLUSIONS: As one of the first studies to apply realistic evaluation in implementation research, it was a good fit, particularly given the growing emphasis on understanding how context influences evidence-based practice. The strengths and limitations of the approach are considered, including how to operationalise it and some of the challenges. This approach provided a useful interpretive framework with which to make sense of the multiple factors that were simultaneously at play and being observed through various data sources, and for developing explanatory theory about using standardised care approaches in practice.
Abstract: In October 2006, the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) of England asked Professor Sir John Tooke to chair a High Level Group on Clinical Effectiveness in response to the chapter 'Waste not, want not' in the CMOs 2005 annual report 'On the State of the Public Health'. The high level group made recommendations to the CMO to address possible ways forward to improve clinical effectiveness in the UK National Health Service (NHS) and promote clinical engagement to deliver this. The report contained a short section on research needs that emerged from the process of writing the report, but in order to more fully identify the relevant research agenda Professor Sir John Tooke asked Professor Martin Eccles to convene an expert group - the Clinical Effectiveness Research Agenda Group (CERAG) - to define the research agenda. The CERAG's terms of reference were 'to further elaborate the research agenda in relation to pursuing clinically effective practice within the (UK) National Health Service'. This editorial presents the summary of the CERAG report and recommendations.
Abstract: AIM: To explore how protocol-based care affects clinical decision-making. BACKGROUND: In the context of evidence-based practice, protocol-based care is a mechanism for facilitating the standardisation of care and streamlining decision-making through rationalising the information with which to make judgements and ultimately decisions. However, whether protocol-based care does, in the reality of practice, standardise decision-making is unknown. This paper reports on a study that explored the impact of protocol-based care on nurses' decision-making. DESIGN: Theoretically informed by realistic evaluation and the promoting action on research implementation in health services framework, a case study design using ethnographic methods was used. Two sites were purposively sampled; a diabetic and endocrine unit and a cardiac medical unit. METHODS: Within each site, data collection included observation, postobservation semi-structured interviews with staff and patients, field notes, feedback sessions and document review. Data were inductively and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Decisions made by nurses in both sites were varied according to many different and interacting factors. While several standardised care approaches were available for use, in reality, a variety of information sources informed decision-making. The primary approach to knowledge exchange and acquisition was person-to-person; decision-making was a social activity. Rarely were standardised care approaches obviously referred to; nurses described following a mental flowchart, not necessarily linked to a particular guideline or protocol. When standardised care approaches were used, it was reported that they were used flexibly and particularised. CONCLUSIONS: While the logic of protocol-based care is algorithmic, in the reality of clinical practice, other sources of information supported nurses' decision-making process. This has significant implications for the political goal of standardisation. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The successful implementation and judicious use of tools such as protocols and guidelines will likely be dependant on approaches that facilitate the development of nurses' decision-making processes in parallel to paying attention to the influence of context.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The policy drive for the UK National Health Service (NHS) has focused on the need for high quality services informed by evidence of best practice. The introduction of care pathways and protocols to standardise care and support implementation of evidence into practice has taken place across the NHS with limited evaluation of their impact. A multi-site case study evaluation was undertaken to assess the impact of use of care pathways and protocols on clinicians, service users and service delivery. One of the five sites was a midwifery-led Birth Centre, where an adapted version of the All Wales Clinical Pathway for Normal Birth had been implemented. METHODS: The overarching framework was realistic evaluation. A case study design enabled the capture of data on use of the pathway in the clinical setting, use of multiple methods of data collection and opportunity to study and understand the experiences of clinicians and service users whose care was informed by the pathway. Women attending the Birth Centre were recruited at their 36 week antenatal visit. Episodes of care during labour were observed, following which the woman and the midwife who cared for her were interviewed about use of the pathway. Interviews were also held with other key stakeholders from the study site. Qualitative data were content analysed. RESULTS: Observations were undertaken of four women during labour. Eighteen interviews were conducted with clinicians and women, including the women whose care was observed and the midwives who cared for them, senior midwifery managers and obstetricians. The implementation of the pathway resulted in a number of anticipated benefits, including increased midwifery confidence in skills to support normal birth and promotion of team working. There were also unintended consequences, including concerns about a lack of documentation of labour care and negative impact on working relationships with obstetric and other midwifery colleagues. Women were unaware their care was informed by a care pathway. CONCLUSION: Care pathways are complex interventions which generate a number of consequences for practice. Those considering introduction of pathways need to ensure all relevant stakeholders are engaged with this and develop robust evaluation strategies to accompany implementation.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: There is a general expectation within healthcare that organizations should use evidence-based practice (EBP) as an approach to improving the quality of care. However, challenges exist regarding how to make EBP a reality, particularly at an organizational level and as a routine, sustained aspect of professional practice. METHODS: A mixed method explanatory case study was conducted to study context; i.e., in terms of the presence or absence of multiple, inter-related contextual elements and associated strategic approaches required for integrated, routine use of EBP ('institutionalization'). The Pettigrew et al. Content, Context, and Process model was used as the theoretical framework. Two sites in the US were purposively sampled to provide contrasting cases: i.e., a 'role model' site, widely recognized as demonstrating capacity to successfully implement and sustain EBP to a greater degree than others; and a 'beginner' site, self-perceived as early in the journey towards institutionalization. RESULTS: The two sites were clearly different in terms of their organizational context, level of EBP activity, and degree of institutionalization. For example, the role model site had a pervasive, integrated presence of EBP versus a sporadic, isolated presence in the beginner site. Within the inner context of the role model site, there was also a combination of the Pettigrew and colleagues' receptive elements that, together, appeared to enhance its ability to effectively implement EBP-related change at multiple levels. In contrast, the beginner site, which had been involved for a few years in EBP-related efforts, had primarily non-receptive conditions in several contextual elements and a fairly low overall level of EBP receptivity. The beginner site thus appeared, at the time of data collection, to lack an integrated context to either support or facilitate the institutionalization of EBP. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide evidence of some of the key contextual elements that may require attention if institutionalization of EBP is to be realized. They also suggest the need for an integrated set of receptive contextual elements to achieve EBP institutionalization; and they further support the importance of specific interactions among these elements, including ways in which leadership affects other contextual elements positively or negatively.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The organizational context in which healthcare is delivered is thought to play an important role in mediating the use of knowledge in practice. Additionally, a number of potentially modifiable contextual factors have been shown to make an organizational context more amenable to change. However, understanding of how these factors operate to influence organizational context and knowledge use remains limited. In particular, research to understand knowledge translation in the long-term care setting is scarce. Further research is therefore required to provide robust explanations of the characteristics of organizational context in relation to knowledge use. AIM: To develop a robust explanation of the way organizational context mediates the use of knowledge in practice in long-term care facilities. DESIGN: This is longitudinal, in-depth qualitative case study research using exploratory and interpretive methods to explore the role of organizational context in influencing knowledge translation. The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase one, comprehensive case studies will be conducted in three facilities. Following data analysis and proposition development, phase two will continue with focused case studies to elaborate emerging themes and theory. Study sites will be purposively selected. In both phases, data will be collected using a variety of approaches, including non-participant observation, key informant interviews, family perspectives, focus groups, and documentary evidence (including, but not limited to, policies, notices, and photographs of physical resources). Data analysis will comprise an iterative process of identifying convergent evidence within each case study and then examining and comparing the evidence across multiple case studies to draw conclusions from the study as a whole. Additionally, findings that emerge through this project will be compared and considered alongside those that are emerging from project one. In this way, pattern matching based on explanation building will be used to frame the analysis and develop an explanation of organizational context and knowledge use over time. An improved understanding of the contextual factors that mediate knowledge use will inform future development and testing of interventions to enhance knowledge use, with the ultimate aim of improving the outcomes for residents in long-term care settings.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The PARiHS framework (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) has proved to be a useful practical and conceptual heuristic for many researchers and practitioners in framing their research or knowledge translation endeavours. However, as a conceptual framework it still remains untested and therefore its contribution to the overall development and testing of theory in the field of implementation science is largely unquantified. DISCUSSION: This being the case, the paper provides an integrated summary of our conceptual and theoretical thinking so far and introduces a typology (derived from social policy analysis) used to distinguish between the terms conceptual framework, theory and model - important definitional and conceptual issues in trying to refine theoretical and methodological approaches to knowledge translation. Secondly, the paper describes the next phase of our work, in particular concentrating on the conceptual thinking and mapping that has led to the generation of the hypothesis that the PARiHS framework is best utilised as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence (E) and context (C), and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. In the process of refining this next phase of our work, we have had to consider the wider issues around the use of theories to inform and shape our research activity; the ongoing challenges of developing robust and sensitive measures; facilitation as an intervention for getting research into practice; and finally to note how the current debates around evidence into practice are adopting wider notions that fit innovations more generally. SUMMARY: The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. In order to expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, we suggest the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. We also recommend further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of protocol-based care on nursing roles, practice and service delivery. DESIGN: Case study evaluation informed by realistic evaluation methodology. Qualitative data collection methods were used including non-participant observation, post-observation interviews with nurses and patients, key informant interviews, tracking patient journeys and document review. PARTICIPANTS: 141 participants took part including 73 nurses, midwives and health visitors, 4 allied health professionals, 20 doctors, 5 support staff and 39 patients. SETTINGS: Five sites were purposively sampled and included acute and primary care service provision. FINDINGS: As a mechanism for standardization, the use of protocol-based care approaches such as guidelines, care pathways, protocols and algorithms was patchy and dependent on contextual, professional and individual factors. Protocol-based care approaches were commonly used as checklists and for reference; nurses and doctors expressed concern that such use could lead to a 'tick box mentality' and restricted judgement. By using standardized care approaches nurses were taking on new tasks and developing skills beyond the traditional scope of practice including prescribing, diagnosing, ordering tests and sometimes deciding on treatments. The ability to perform these roles meant that they were able to run clinics or services independently. The extension of roles to incorporate prescribing, for example, meant that nurses were able to provide a more streamlined service for patients because they did not have to refer to doctors. In turn, it was reported that this reduced doctors' workload. Protocol-based care was viewed as a 'nurses' thing'; however, some General Practitioners and junior doctors were using available standardized care approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The potential of standardization was mediated by the patchy use of protocol-based care approaches and negative perceptions about standardization. Use of protocol-based care has the potential to impact on nurses' roles, increasing their autonomy and subsequently impacting on service delivery.
Abstract: AIM: This commentary considers the shift in evidence-informed practice away from the individual practitioner to an acknowledgement that context is also important. BACKGROUND: The view of practitioner as 'rational agent' capable of searching, appraising and translating research evidence into individual practice has dominated the literature. However, a growing body of research leads us to question whether evidence use is indeed an individual activity. EVALUATION: Key research studies were purposively selected to build the case for the arguments made. KEY ISSUES: Apart from attitude, there is little to indicate that any potential individual determinants influence research use. Views of what constitutes evidence for evidence-based practice have become more inclusive and sophisticated. Evidence tends to be contextually bound and individually interpreted and particularized within that context. As such, evidence use is beginning to be recognized more widely as a contingent process, which varies across setting and time. A number of contextual factors have been found to be potentially influential including culture and leadership. CONCLUSION(S) AND IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: It cannot be assumed that evidence-based resources such as clinical guidelines will be accepted at face value by practitioners. Developing the skills of individuals to critically appraise research will not automatically lead to greater evidence use. Reviewing organizations' capacity for evidence-informed practice as a system property and cultural factor may lead to insights about the barriers and facilitators to evidence use. Investing in the capability of key individuals at multiple levels of the organization as leaders of evidence-based practice activities may be one promising organizational strategy.
Abstract: In a health care context in which research evidence is not routinely used in practice there have been increasingly loud calls for the use of theory from investigators working in the field of knowledge translation. Implementation researchers argue that theory should be used to guide the design of testable and practical intervention strategies, and thus contribute to generalisable knowledge about implementation interventions. This commentary critically examines modelling papers written by a team of scholars who aimed to disentangle some of the relationships determining research utilization by scrutinizing an existing conceptual framework, which acknowledges along with other factors, the importance of contextual factors in knowledge translation. These papers are used as a vehicle to explore theory application in knowledge translation research. As theory use and development is in its infancy the commentary considers some key issues including different ideological perspectives, factors for and against theory use, ensuring conceptual clarity, selecting coherent overarching frameworks, and choosing appropriately amongst theories. Finally an agenda for theory informed research is outlined, which highlights the need for scholarly, pluralistic and collaborative activity if the state of knowledge translation science is to advance.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an expected approach to improving the quality of patient care and service delivery in health care systems internationally that is yet to be realized. Given the current evidence-practice gap, numerous authors describe barriers to achieving EBP. One recurrently identified barrier is the setting or context of practice, which is likewise cited as a potential part of the solution to the gap. The purpose of this study is to identify key contextual elements and related strategic processes in organizations that find and use evidence at multiple levels, in an ongoing, integrated fashion, in contrast to those that do not. METHODS: The core theoretical framework for this multi-method explanatory case study is Pettigrew and Whipp's Content, Context, and Process model of strategic change. This framework focuses data collection on three entities: the Why of strategic change, the What of strategic change, and the How of strategic change, in this case related to implementation and normalization of EBP. The data collection plan, designed to capture relevant organizational context and related outcomes, focuses on eight interrelated factors said to characterize a receptive context. Selective, purposive sampling will provide contrasting results between two cases (departments of nursing) and three embedded units in each. Data collection methods will include quantitative tools (e.g., regarding culture) and qualitative approaches including focus groups, interviews, and documents review (e.g., regarding integration and "success") relevant to the EBP initiative. DISCUSSION: This study should provide information regarding contextual elements and related strategic processes key to successful implementation and sustainability of EBP, specifically in terms of a pervasive pattern in an acute care hospital-based health care setting. Additionally, this study will identify key contextual elements that differentiate successful implementation and sustainability of EBP efforts, both within varying levels of a hospital-based clinical setting and across similar hospital settings interested in EBP.
Abstract: In a healthcare context in which research evidence is not used routinely in practice, there have been increasingly loud calls for the use of theory from investigators working in the field of knowledge translation. Implementation researchers argue that theory should be used to guide the design of testable and practical intervention strategies, and thus, contribute to generalizable knowledge about implementation interventions. The purpose of this commentary is to critique model papers writing by a team of scholars who aimed to disentangle some of the relationships determining research utilization, by scrutinizing an existing conceptual framework that acknowledges, along with other factors, the importance of contextual factors in knowledge translation. These papers are used as a vehicle to explore theory application in knowledge translation research. As theory use and development is in its infancy, some key issues, including different ideological perspectives, factors for and against theory use, ensuring conceptual clarity, selecting coherent overarching frameworks, and choosing appropriately among theories, are considered. Finally, an agenda for theory-informed research is outlined, which highlights the need for scholarly, pluralistic, and collaborative activity if the state of knowledge translation science is to advance.
Abstract: This article provides an overview of the research governance framework and ethical review. Issues surrounding new procedures are clarified and practical advice is provided for those embarking on research projects. The article discusses limitations and highlights possible future changes to research governance in the United Kingdom.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Facilitation has been identified in the literature as a potentially key component of successful implementation. It has not, however, either been well-defined or well-studied. Significant questions remain about the operational definition of facilitation and about the relationship of facilitation to other interventions, especially to other change agent roles when used in multi-faceted implementation projects. Researchers who are part of the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) are actively exploring various approaches and processes, including facilitation, to enable implementation of best practices in the Veterans Health Administration health care system - the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States. This paper describes a systematic, retrospective evaluation of implementation-related facilitation experiences within QUERI, a quality improvement program developed by the US Department of Veterans Affairs. METHODS: A post-hoc evaluation was conducted through a series of semi-structured interviews to examine the concept of facilitation across several multi-site QUERI implementation studies. The interview process is based on a technique developed in the field of education, which systematically enhances learning through experience by stimulating recall and reflection regarding past complex activities. An iterative content analysis approach relative to a set of conceptually-based interview questions was used for data analysis. FINDINGS: Findings suggest that facilitation, within an implementation study initiated by a central change agency, is a deliberate and valued process of interactive problem solving and support that occurs in the context of a recognized need for improvement and a supportive interpersonal relationship. Facilitation was described primarily as a distinct role with a number of potentially crucial behaviors and activities. Data further suggest that external facilitators were likely to use or integrate other implementation interventions, while performing this problem-solving and supportive role. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation provides evidence to suggest that facilitation could be considered a distinct implementation intervention, just as audit and feedback, educational outreach, or similar methods are considered to be discrete interventions. As such, facilitation should be well-defined and explicitly evaluated for its perceived usefulness within multi-intervention implementation projects. Additionally, researchers should better define the specific contribution of facilitation to the success of implementation in different types of projects, different types of sites, and with evidence and innovations of varying levels of strength and complexity.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Protocol-based care is increasingly being used to deliver collaborative, integrated and improved patient-centred care, based on the best available evidence. This article provides an overview of key issues arising from protocol-based care literature to illustrate the research agenda for this important care delivery approach. CONCLUSION: Protocols provide great potential to deliver best practice. However, questions remain about the benefits of protocol-based care.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The challenges of implementing evidence-based practice are complex and varied. Against this background a framework has been developed to represent the multiple factors that may influence the implementation of evidence into practice. It is proposed that successful implementation is dependent upon the nature of the evidence being used, the quality of context, and, the type of facilitation required to enable the change process. This study sets out to scrutinize the elements of the framework through empirical enquiry. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to address the following questions: * What factors do practitioners identify as the most important in enabling implementation of evidence into practice? * What are the factors practitioners identify that mediate the implementation of evidence into practice? * Do the concepts of evidence, context and facilitation constitute the key elements of a framework for getting evidence into practice? DESIGN AND METHODS: The study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1: Exploratory focus groups (n = 2) were conducted to inform the development of an interview guide. This was used with individual key informants in case study sites. Phase 2: Two sites with on-going or recent implementation projects were studied. Within sites semi-structured interviews were conducted (n = 17). RESULTS: A number of key issues in relation to the implementation of evidence into practice emerged including: the nature and role of evidence, relevance and fit with organizational and practice issues, multi-professional relationships and collaboration, role of the project lead and resources. CONCLUSIONS: The results are discussed with reference to the wider literature and in relation to the on-going development of the framework. Crucially the growing body of evidence reveals that a focus on individual approaches to implementing evidence-based practice, such as skilling-up practitioners to appraise research evidence, will be ineffective by themselves. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Key elements that require attention in implementing evidence into practice are presented and may provide a useful checklist for future implementation and evaluation projects.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Considerable financial and philosophical effort has been expended on the evidence-based practice agenda. Whilst few would disagree with the notion of delivering care based on information about what works, there remain significant challenges about what evidence is, and thus how practitioners use it in decision-making in the reality of clinical practice. AIM: This paper continues the debate about the nature of evidence and argues for the use of a broader evidence base in the implementation of patient-centred care. DISCUSSION: Against a background of financial constraints, risk reduction, increased managerialism research evidence, and more specifically research about effectiveness, have assumed pre-eminence. However, the practice of effective nursing, which is mediated through the contact and relationship between individual practitioner and patient, can only be achieved by using several sources of evidence. This paper outlines the potential contribution of four types of evidence in the delivery of care, namely research, clinical experience, patient experience and information from the local context. Fundamentally, drawing on these four sources of evidence will require the bringing together of two approaches to care: the external, scientific and the internal, intuitive. CONCLUSION: Having described the characteristics of a broader evidence base for practice, the challenge remains to ensure that each is as robust as possible, and that they are melded coherently and sensibly in the real time of practice. Some of the ideas presented in this paper challenge more traditional approaches to evidence-based practice. The delivery of effective, evidence-based patient-centred care will only be realized when a broader definition of what counts as evidence is embraced.
Abstract: Mounting pressure is being exerted to ensure that the delivery of care is evidence-based and clinically effective. However, the challenge this presents to practitioners is complex. The authors propose that successful implementation of evidence into practice is a function of three elements: the nature of the evidence; the context in which the change is to take place; and the way the process is managed. A framework has been developed to represent these factors. For those about to embark on implementation work, this article closes by highlighting a number of key questions for consideration, stimulated by the framework.
Abstract: AIM OF PAPER: This paper presents the findings of a concept analysis of 'context' in relation to the successful implementation of evidence into practice. BACKGROUND: In 1998, a conceptual framework was developed that represented the interplay and interdependence of the many factors influencing the uptake of evidence into practice [Kitson A., Harvey G. & McCormack B. (1998) Quality in Health Care 7, 149]. One of the key elements of the framework was 'context', that is, the setting in which evidence is implemented. It was proposed that key factors in the context of health care practice had a significant impact on the implementation and uptake of evidence. As part of the on-going development and refinement of the framework, the elements within it have undergone a concept analysis in order to provide some theoretical and conceptual rigour to its content. METHODS: Morse's [Morse J.M. (1995) Advances in Nursing Science 17, 31; Morse J.M., Hupcey J.E. & Mitcham C. (1996) Scholarly Inquiry for Nursing Practice. An International Journal 10, 253] approach to concept analysis was used as a framework to review semi-nal texts critically and the supporting research literature in order to establish the conceptual clarity and maturity of 'context' in relation to its importance in the implementation of evidence-based practice. FINDINGS: Characteristics of the concept of context in terms of organizational culture, leadership and measurement are outlined. A main finding is that context specifically means 'the setting in which practice takes place', but that the term itself does little to reflect the complexity of the concept. Whilst the themes of culture and leadership are central characteristics of the concept, the theme of 'measurement' is better articulated through the broader term of 'evaluation'. CONCLUSIONS: There is inconsistency in the use of the term and this has an impact on claims of its importance. The concept of context lacks clarity because of the many issues that impact on the way it is characterized. Additionally, there is limited understanding of the consequences of working with different contexts. Thus, the implications of using context as a variable in research studies exploring research implementation are as yet largely unknown. The concept of context is partially developed but in need of further delineation and comparison.
Abstract: AIM OF PAPER: This paper presents the findings of a concept analysis of facilitation in relation to successful implementation of evidence into practice. BACKGROUND: In 1998, we presented a conceptual framework that represented the interplay and interdependence of the many factors influencing the uptake of evidence into practice. One of the three elements of the framework was facilitation, alongside the nature of evidence and context. It was proposed that facilitators had a key role in helping individuals and teams understand what they needed to change and how they needed to change it. As part of the on-going development and refinement of the framework, the elements within it have undergone a concept analysis in order to provide theoretical and conceptual clarity. METHODS: The concept analysis approach was used as a framework to review critically the research literature and seminal texts in order to establish the conceptual clarity and maturity of facilitation in relation to its role in the implementation of evidence-based practice. FINDINGS: The concept of facilitation is partially developed and in need of delineation and comparison. Here, the purpose, role and skills and attributes of facilitators are explored in order to try and make distinctions between this role and other change agent roles such as educational outreach workers, academic detailers and opinion leaders. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that facilitation can be represented as a set of continua, with the purpose of facilitation ranging from a discrete task-focused activity to a more holistic process of enabling individuals, teams and organizations to change. A number of defining characteristics of facilitation are proposed. However, further research to clarify and evaluate different models of facilitation is required.
Abstract: Finding ways to deliver care based on the best possible evidence remains an ongoing challenge. Further theoretical developments of a conceptual framework are presented which influence the uptake of evidence into practice. A concept analysis has been conducted on the key elements of the framework--evidence, context, and facilitation--leading to refinement of the framework. While these three essential elements remain key to the process of implementation, changes have been made to their constituent sub-elements, enabling the detail of the framework to be revised. The concept analysis has shown that the relationship between the elements and sub-elements and their relative importance need to be better understood when implementing evidence based practice. Increased understanding of these relationships would help staff to plan more effective change strategies. Anecdotal reports suggest that the framework has a good level of validity. It is planned to develop it into a practical tool to aid those involved in planning, implementing, and evaluating the impact of changes in health care.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: There is currently a political enthusiasm for the development and use of clinical guidelines despite, paradoxically, there being relatively few healthcare issues that have a sound research evidence base. As decisions have to be made even where there is an undetermined evidence base and that limiting recommendations to where evidence exists may reduce the scope of guidelines, thus limiting their value to practitioners, guideline developers have to rely on various different sources of evidence and adapt their methods accordingly. This paper outlines a method for guideline development which incorporates a consensus process devised to tackle the challenges of a variable research evidence base for the development of a national clinical guideline on risk assessment and prevention of pressure ulcers. METHOD: To inform the recommendations of the guideline a formal consensus process based on a nominal group technique was used to incorporate three strands of evidence: research, clinical expertise, and patient experience. RESULTS: The recommendations for this guideline were derived directly from the statements agreed in the formal consensus process and from key evidence-based findings from the systematic reviews. The existing format of the statements that participants had rated allowed a straightforward revision to "active" recommendations, thus reducing further risk of subjectivity entering into the process. CONCLUSIONS: The method outlined proved to be a practical and systematic way of integrating a number of different evidence sources. The resultant guideline is a mixture of research based and consensus based recommendations. Given the lack of available guidance on how to mix research with expert opinion and patient experiences, the method used for the development of this guideline has been outlined so that other guideline developers may use, adapt, and test it further.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The United Kingdom government's policy documents spanning the last decade clearly envisage the patient as a consumer of health care. In this context this paper discusses recent research findings related to the health-promotion practice of medication delivered by nurses in England in a variety of health care settings. Literature exploring consumerism in health care highlights a number of principles which were used to develop a framework to evaluate the data collected in this study. METHOD: Non-participant observation and audio-recordings of nurse-patient interactions about medications were collected in seven different contexts focusing on adults, older people, mental health and community nurse settings. Post-interaction interviews with nurse and patient participants were conducted to explore views on quality, satisfaction with, and intended outcomes of, the interactions. FINDINGS: Generally, the findings demonstrated that the espoused theory and practice reality regarding the carrying out of consumerist principles are incongruous. Interactions contained relatively simple information, were dominated and led by nurses and offered little opportunity for patient choice. Patients, however, expressed a satisfaction with minimal information and involvement. CONCLUSION: The findings are discussed with reference to a number of different contextual factors: acuity of illness, perceived balance of power, information gaps, patterns of contact and nurse-patient relationships, and patient-centred care.
Abstract: Nurses have a potentially important contribution to make to educating patients about medications. This nursing role is likely to acquire increasing significance as the number of nurses independently prescribing medicines grows, in addition to those nurses occupying autonomous and extended roles that involve ongoing assessment and monitoring of patients' medicine-taking behaviour. As part of a study(1)commissioned to evaluate nurses' educational preparation for, and practice of, medication education, a national survey of nurse education institutions was undertaken. A postal questionnaire was distributed to identified individuals within 51 education institutions in England. Respondents were asked about a number of curriculum design and delivery factors related to subjects central to medication education: pharmacology, patient education and communication skills. Analysis highlighted a number of themes: the teaching of pharmacology is generally integrated within other curricular modules; respondents were dissatisfied with insufficient curricular time devoted to taught pharmacology; the importance of lecturers' ability to apply theory to practice; a lack of clarity concerning pharmacology learning outcomes applied to medication education; and respondents' perceptions that opportunities for integrating pharmacology knowledge, patient education and communication skills were available within practice settings. The significance and implications of the findings are discussed in the context of current educational policy.
Abstract: AIM: This study set out to explore nurses' current contribution to medication education and the clinical contextual factors that influence current practice. METHOD: Nurses' practice was investigated using a case study approach. Methods used to collect data were: audio-recordings and observation of nurse-patient interactions about medication, post-interaction interviews with nurses and patients, analysis of relevant written documentation and researcher observation and field notes. RESULTS: Findings indicate that nurses' contribution to medication education is commonly limited to giving simple information about medicines, involving the name, purpose, colour, number of tablets and the time and frequency for their administration. CONCLUSION: Nurse-patient relationships, patterns of contact and philosophy of care were all identified as contributory factors to enabling the practice of medication education in clinical areas.
Abstract: Clinical guidelines are viewed as an important tool in the quest to promote evidence based practice. Consequently, there has been a proliferation in guideline development at a national and local level. This paper describes what clinical guidelines are and how they have been developed by a national organisation--the Royal College of Nursing (RCN). Drawing on the development of two tissue viability guidelines: The Management of Patients with Venous Leg Ulcers and Risk Assessment and Prevention of Pressure Ulcers, some challenges inherent in guideline development are outlined. Certain desirable attributes that a clinical guideline should exhibit in order for it to be utilisable and effective in practice are outlined as these provide a standard for guideline developers. In reality the practice of guideline development will depend upon the topic, the experience of the guideline group, the purpose of the guidelines and the evidence available. Our experience suggests that producing a clinically valid and utilisable guideline is a labour and resource intensive process. It is also time consuming. An alternative strategy to developing local guidelines from scratch would be to adapt an existing guideline to local circumstances. A stepwise process is presented in the paper to assist people with this process.
Abstract: Current social and demographic trends, combined with 'the new policy agenda', highlight the importance of nurses' role in educating patients about medication. In the absence of previous research investigation, this study set out to explore nurses' current contribution to medication education and the clinical contextual factors that influence current practice. The evidence base for effective medication education was established from reviews of literature and focus groups with key informants. Nurses' practice was investigated using a case study approach in seven clinical areas representing adult, care of the older person, mental health and community nursing contexts. Methods used to collect data were: audio-recordings (n=37) and observation (n=48) of nurse-patient interactions about medication, post-interaction interviews with nurses (n=29), post-interaction interviews with patients (n=39), analysis of relevant written documentation and researcher observation and field notes. Data sources within each case were subjected to systematic content analysis in order to identify current practice and contextual influences within each case. Cross-case analysis was also employed in order to identify explanations for any differentiation in practice. Findings indicate that nurses' contribution to medication education is commonly limited to simple information giving about medicines, involving the name, purpose, colour, number of tablets and the time and frequency that medications should be administered. Nurses' practice in two of the seven clinical areas was characterised by interactions that more closely demonstrated features of what is known to constitute more comprehensive and effective medication education. Analysis of contextual influences within and between cases allowed explanations to be derived for the types of medication education interactions observed. These concerned: patient characteristics, perceived and expressed preferences of patients for information, characteristics of the nurse-patient relationship, lack of time and high workload, and the philosophy of care within the clinical area. In all clinical areas, nurses were not explicitly and judiciously using available evidence to inform their medication-related interactions. The paper concludes with discussion and implications of the findings.
Abstract: Current health care policy and practice contexts in the UK point to the importance of nurses' ability to make an effective contribution to educating patients about medication, as part of their role in health education and health promotion. Nurses' potential contribution to this important activity will inevitably be dependent on knowledge and skills acquired during preregistration and postregistration programmes of education. Against this backdrop, changes in pre and postregistration nurse education in the UK in the past decade highlight the importance and timeliness of evaluating the adequacy of educational preparation for a medication role. This paper reports on the findings from an evaluation of UK educational preparation for a medication education role in practice. A case study design was used to investigate current educational preparation at three education institutions. Multiple methods of data collection at each site involved focus group discussions with lecturers and practitioners, individual interviews with key personnel, nonparticipant observation of teaching sessions, postobservation interviews with students and curriculum analysis. Findings highlighted the importance of a number of dimensions of preparation for practice of such a role: the need for sufficient taught pharmacology; opportunities for application and integration of prerequisite knowledge and skills; the importance of practice-based learning; the need for an evidence-based curriculum, and the importance of clarifying outcomes and competencies required for a medication education role within pre and postregistration curricula. The paper concludes with a discussion and implications of the findings.
Abstract: AIM: This paper explores the historical and political basis of equity and rationing in the British National Health Service (NHS). BACKGROUND: Rationing has always featured in the NHS as an implicit, rather than explicit process. Recent healthcare reforms have highlighted the inequity of healthcare provision in the UK and made the rationing debate more explicit. ORIGINS OF INFORMATION: Information is drawn from a variety of sources which include research studies, review articles and books, policy documents and personal experience of working in the NHS. KEY ISSUES: The search for efficiency in the new NHS is in conflict with the principle of equity and the most vulnerable groups in society are being denied access to healthcare. Decisions about rationing are currently made at a local rather than a national level resulting in variability of health service provision, an inconsistency which will continue with the development of primary care groups. CONCLUSIONS: Rationing of healthcare resources is thought to be inevitable as demands for healthcare increase in a funds-limited service. Rationing of resources is a political problem that requires some form of guidance from central government.
