A narrative review of recent developments in knowledge translation and implications for mental health care providers

Implementation strategies for knowledge products in primary healthcare: a systematic review of systematic reviews (Preprint)

Background

The underuse or overuse of knowledge products leads to waste in health care, and primary care is no exception.

Objective

This study aimed to characterize which knowledge products are frequently implemented, the implementation strategies used in primary care, and the implementation outcomes that are measured.

Methods

We performed a systematic review (SR) of SRs using the Cochrane systematic approach to include eligible SRs. The inclusion criteria were any primary care contexts, health care professionals and patients, any Effective Practice and Organization of Care implementation strategies of specified knowledge products, any comparators, and any implementation outcomes based on the Proctor framework. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Ovid PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from their inception to October 2019 without any restrictions. We searched the references of the included SRs. Pairs of reviewers independently performed selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment by using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. Data extraction was informed by the Effective Practice and Organization of Care taxonomy for implementation strategies and the Proctor framework for implementation outcomes. We performed a descriptive analysis and summarized the results by using a narrative synthesis.

Results

Of the 11,101 records identified, 81 (0.73%) SRs were included. Of these 81, a total of 47 (58%) SRs involved health care professionals alone. Moreover, 15 SRs had a high or moderate methodological quality. Most of them addressed 1 type of knowledge product (56/81, 69%), common clinical practice guidelines (26/56, 46%) or management, and behavioral or pharmacological health interventions (24/56, 43%). Mixed strategies were used for implementation (67/81, 83%), predominantly education-based (meetings in 60/81, 74%; materials distribution in 59/81, 73%; and academic detailing in 45/81, 56%), reminder (53/81, 36%), and audit and feedback (40/81, 49%) strategies. Education meetings (P=.13) and academic detailing (P=.11) seemed to be used more when the population was composed of health care professionals alone. Improvements in the adoption of knowledge products were the most commonly measured outcome (72/81, 89%). The evidence level was reported in 12% (10/81) of SRs on 62 outcomes (including 48 improvements in adoption), of which 16 (26%) outcomes were of moderate or high level.

Conclusions

Clinical practice guidelines and management and behavioral or pharmacological health interventions are the most commonly implemented knowledge products and are implemented through the mixed use of educational, reminder, and audit and feedback strategies. There is a need for a strong methodology for the SR of randomized controlled trials to explore their effectiveness and the entire cascade of implementation outcomes.

Improving the usefulness of evidence concerning the effectiveness of implementation strategies for knowledge products in primary healthcare: protocol for a series of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

The literature on the implementation of knowledge products is extensive. However, this literature is still difficult to interpret for policymakers and other stakeholders when faced with choosing implementation strategies likely to bring about successful change in their health systems. This work has the particularity to examine the scope of this literature, and to clarify the effectiveness of implementation strategies for different knowledge products. Consequently, we aim to (1) determine the strengths and weaknesses of existing literature overviews; (2) produce a detailed portrait of the literature on implementation strategies for various knowledge products; and (3) assess the effectiveness of implementation strategies for each knowledge product identified and classify them.

METHODS

We will use a three-phase approach consisting of a critical analysis of existing literature overviews, a systematic review of systematic reviews, and a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We will follow the Cochrane Methodology for each of the three phases. Our eligibility criteria are defined following a PICOS approach: Population, individuals or stakeholders participating in healthcare delivery, specifically, healthcare providers, caregivers, and end users; Intervention, any type of strategy aiming to implement a knowledge product including, but not limited to, a decision support tool, a clinical practice guideline, a policy brief, or a decision-making tool, a one-pager, or a health intervention; Comparison, any comparator will be considered; Outcomes, phases 1 and 2-any outcome related to implementation strategies including, but not limited to, the measures of adherence/fidelity to the use of knowledge products, their acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, adaptability, implementation costs, penetration/reach and sustainability; phase 3-any additional outcome related to patients (psychosocial, health behavioral, and clinical outcomes) or healthcare professionals (behavioral and performance outcomes); Setting, primary healthcare has to be covered. We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from their inception onwards. For each phase, two reviewers will independently perform the selection of studies, data extraction, and assess their methodological quality. We will analyze extracted data, and perform narrative syntheses, and meta-analyses when possible.

DISCUSSION

Our results could inform not only the overviews' methodology but also the development of an online platform for the implementation strategies of knowledge products. This platform could be useful for stakeholders in implementation science.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Protocol registered on Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/eb8w2/.

[Art-based rehabilitation program training: a transfer of knowledge]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the implementation, processes and perceived efficacy of a pilot project of knowledge transfer in public health, which involves the training/supervision of new practitioners in an art-based rehabilitation program. This innovative evidence-based intervention seeks to promote the well-being of youth with mental disorders through circus and theater workshops. The purpose of this study is to provide a formative evaluation of this pilot project in order to improve the intervention and the knowledge transfer practices in public health.

METHODS

This research is based on a participatory and mixed approach, with a ?triangulation-convergence? design, integrating a thematic analysis of qualitative data (semi-structured interviews and Focus Groups), a descriptive analysis of quantitative data (questionnaire of reaction) and a documentary compliance analysis (grid of activity monitoring).

RESULTS

The results show that the knowledge transfer strategy has resulted in the training of practitioners who feel ready to take charge of the project, despite implementation gaps. The main barrier was the prolonged and unforeseen absence of project leaders, for reasons out of their control. Nevertheless, the motivation and commitment of the team members acted as a catalyst in this pilot project, which became a setting for discussion and experimentation of the knowledge transfer strategy.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the benefits of adopting a participatory approach and mixed method in the evaluation of knowledge transfer in public health, which would better capture the inherent complexity of social interventions.

Effectiveness of Knowledge Translation Strategies in Audiovisual Language Compared With Other Languages to Improve Health Outcomes in Individuals and the General Population: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Knowledge translation (KT) not only encompasses a series of final actions in areas of dissemination, but also the identification of strategies for the implementation of this process.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of KT strategies in audiovisual language compared with other languages to improve health outcomes in the general population.

METHODS

We performed a search in MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PsycARTICLES, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, EMBASE and LILACS.

RESULTS

We included 63 studies encompassing a broad range of study populations, languages that were compared to audiovisual language and measurement scales for outcomes. These studies presented a high risk of bias and the quality of evidence was not sufficient to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the evaluated languages for knowledge translation.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified different languages that could be used in knowledge translation. The knowledge and the effects produced as a result of the strategy diminish as time progresses, regardless of the type of language used. This is an important point to consider when implementing this type of strategy.

Health promotion and knowledge translation: two roads to the same destination?

Health Promotion (HP), a continuously evolving field, is riddled with complexities as experts and community members develop new approaches to researching social behaviours, addressing health concerns and advocating for the values of equity, empowerment and healthy public policy. Similarly complex is the field of knowledge translation (KT), putting research into action for the purpose of changing behaviours, policy and practice. Similar values, methods and techniques govern these two practices. This paper is based on a series of discussions between two young professionals who found themselves navigating the complexities of HP and KT and attempting to understand their chosen fields of practice. The discussions considered such issues as discipline-based silos, the use and purpose of new terminologies and languages in research, and whether or not existing practices are simply being renamed or branded in order to appear innovative and new.

How to improve sharing and application of knowledge in care and support for people with intellectual disabilities? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

To optimise care and support for people with intellectual disabilities (ID), sharing and application of knowledge is a precondition. In healthcare in general, there is a body of knowledge on bridging the 'know-do-gap'. However, it is not known to what extent the identified barriers and facilitators to knowledge sharing and application also hold for the care and support of people with ID, due to its specific characteristics including long-term care. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to identify which organisational factors are enabling and/or disabling in stimulating the sharing and application of knowledge in the care and support of people with ID.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted using five electronic databases of relevant articles published in English between January 2000 and December 2015. During each phase of selection and analysis a minimum of two independent reviewers assessed all articles according to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

In total 2,256 articles were retrieved, of which 19 articles met our inclusion criteria. All organisational factors retrieved from these articles were categorised into three main clusters: (1) characteristics of the intervention (factors related to the tools and processes by which the method was implemented); (2) factors related to people (both at an individual and group level); and, (3) factors related to the organisational context (both material factors (office arrangements and ICT system, resources, time and organisation) and immaterial factors (training, staff, size of team)).

CONCLUSION

Overall analyses of the retrieved factors suggest that they are related to each other through the preconditional role of management (i.e., practice leadership) and the key role of professionals (i.e. (in)ability to fulfill new roles).

Raising awareness of research evidence among health professionals delivering dementia care: Are knowledge translation workshops useful?

Providing information about the latest research via educational sessions to health professionals caring for people with dementia may be insufficient to drive change. This project explored self-reported impacts on practice change of adding information about knowledge translation (KT) to a national dementia education program. Six national workshop days were held. Each provided the option of participating in a Principles of KT and innovation implementation seminar in addition to a clinical topic update (sexualities and dementia, or managing behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia). Six months postworkshop, 321 participants were invited to complete a research utilization survey. Seventy-five responded. KT seminar participants were more likely to report instrumental outcomes (e.g. changed policies, procedures) than those who did not participate in the KT seminar. Including KT information in educational sessions for health professionals may increase the likelihood of practice change in the field of dementia care and warrants further research.

Impact of tailored blogs and content on usage of Web CIPHER - an online platform to help policymakers better engage with evidence from research

BACKGROUND

There is a need to develop innovations that can help bridge the gap between research and policy. Web CIPHER is an online tool designed to help policymakers better engage with research in order to increase its use in health policymaking. The aim of the present study was to test interventions in order to increase policymakers' usage of Web CIPHER. Namely, the impact of posting articles and blogs on topics relevant to the missions and scope of selected policy agencies in the Web CIPHER community.

METHODS

Five policy agencies were targeted for the intervention. Web CIPHER usage data was gathered over a 30-month period using Google Analytics. Time series analysis was used to evaluate whether publication of tailored articles and blogs led to significant changes in usage for all Web CIPHER members from policy agencies, including those from the five target agencies. We further evaluated whether these users showed greater increases in usage following publication of articles and blogs directly targeted at their agency, and if these effects were moderated by the blog author.

RESULTS

Web CIPHER usage gradually increased over time and was significantly predicted by the number of articles but not blogs that were posted throughout the study period. Publication of articles on sexual and reproductive health was followed by sustained increases in usage among all users, including users from the policy agency that targets this area. This effect of topic relevance did not occur for the four remaining target agencies. Finally, page views were higher for articles targeted at one's agency compared to other agencies. This effect also occurred for blogs, particularly when the author was internal to one's agency.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that Web CIPHER usage in general was motivated by general interest, engagement and appeal, as opposed to the agency specificity of content and work relevance. Blogs in and of themselves may not be effective at promoting usage. Thus, in order to increase policymakers' engagement with research through similar online platforms, a potentially effective approach would be to post abundant, frequently updated, engaging, interesting and widely appealing content irrespective of form.

Adapting Knowledge Translation Strategies for Rare Rheumatic Diseases

Rare rheumatic diseases present unique challenges to knowledge translation (KT) researchers. There is often an urgent need to transfer knowledge from research findings into clinical practice to facilitate earlier diagnosis and better outcomes. However, existing KT frameworks have not addressed the specific considerations surrounding rare diseases for which gold standard evidence is not available. Several widely adopted models provide guidance for processes and problems associated with KT. However, they do not address issues surrounding creation or synthesis of knowledge for rare diseases. Additional problems relate to lack of awareness or experience in intended knowledge users, low motivation, and potential barriers to changing practice or policy. Strategies to address the challenges of KT for rare rheumatic diseases include considering different levels of evidence available, linking knowledge creation and transfer directly, incorporating patient and physician advocacy efforts to generate awareness of conditions, and selecting strategies to address barriers to practice or policy change.

Global research challenges and opportunities for mental health and substance-use disorders

The research agenda for global mental health and substance-use disorders has been largely driven by the exigencies of high health burdens and associated unmet needs in low- and middle-income countries. Implementation research focused on context-driven adaptation and innovation in service delivery has begun to yield promising results that are improving the quality of, and access to, care in low-resource settings. Importantly, these efforts have also resulted in the development and augmentation of local, in-country research capacities. Given the complex interplay between mental health and substance-use disorders, medical conditions, and biological and social vulnerabilities, a revitalized research agenda must encompass both local variation and global commonalities in the impact of adversities, multi-morbidities and their consequences across the life course. We recommend priorities for research - as well as guiding principles for context-driven, intersectoral, integrative approaches - that will advance knowledge and answer the most pressing local and global mental health questions and needs, while also promoting a health equity agenda and extending the quality, reach and impact of scientific enquiry.

Perceptions of national guidelines and their (non) implementation in mental healthcare: a deductive and inductive content analysis

BACKGROUND

National guidelines are being produced at an increasing rate, and politicians and managers are expected to promote these guidelines and their implementation in clinical work. However, research seldom deals with how decision-makers can perceive these guidelines or their challenges in a cultural context. Therefore, the aim of this study was twofold: to investigate how well Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) reflected the empirical reality of mental healthcare and to gain an extended understanding of the perceptions of decision-makers operating within this context, in regard to the implementation of evidence-based guidelines.

METHODS

The study took place in the southeast of Sweden and employed a qualitative design. The data were collected through 23 interviews with politicians and managers working either in the county council or in the municipalities. The transcribed text was analysed iteratively and in two distinct phases, first deductively and second inductively by means of qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Our deductive analysis showed that the text strongly reflected two out of three categorisation matrices, i.e. evidence and context representing the PARIHS framework. However, the key element of facilitation was poorly mirrored in the text. Results from the inductive analysis can be seen in light of the main category sitting on the fence; thus, the informants' perceptions reflected ambivalence and contradiction. This was illustrated by conflicting views and differences in culture and ideology, a feeling of security in tradition, a certain amount of resistance to change and a lack of role clarity and clear directions. Together, our two analyses provide a rich description of an organisational culture that is highly unlikely to facilitate the implementation of the national guidelines, together with a distrust of the source behind such guidelines, which stands in stark contrast to the high confidence in the knowledge of experienced people in authority within the organisational context.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings have highlighted that, regardless of by whom guidelines are released, they are not likely to be utilised or implemented if those who are responsible for implementing them do not trust the source. This aspect (i.e. contextual trust) is not covered by PARIHS.

Perceptions of national guidelines and their (non) implementation in mental healthcare: a deductive and inductive content analysis

BACKGROUND

National guidelines are being produced at an increasing rate, and politicians and managers are expected to promote these guidelines and their implementation in clinical work. However, research seldom deals with how decision-makers can perceive these guidelines or their challenges in a cultural context. Therefore, the aim of this study was twofold: to investigate how well Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) reflected the empirical reality of mental healthcare and to gain an extended understanding of the perceptions of decision-makers operating within this context, in regard to the implementation of evidence-based guidelines.

METHODS

The study took place in the southeast of Sweden and employed a qualitative design. The data were collected through 23 interviews with politicians and managers working either in the county council or in the municipalities. The transcribed text was analysed iteratively and in two distinct phases, first deductively and second inductively by means of qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Our deductive analysis showed that the text strongly reflected two out of three categorisation matrices, i.e. evidence and context representing the PARIHS framework. However, the key element of facilitation was poorly mirrored in the text. Results from the inductive analysis can be seen in light of the main category sitting on the fence; thus, the informants' perceptions reflected ambivalence and contradiction. This was illustrated by conflicting views and differences in culture and ideology, a feeling of security in tradition, a certain amount of resistance to change and a lack of role clarity and clear directions. Together, our two analyses provide a rich description of an organisational culture that is highly unlikely to facilitate the implementation of the national guidelines, together with a distrust of the source behind such guidelines, which stands in stark contrast to the high confidence in the knowledge of experienced people in authority within the organisational context.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings have highlighted that, regardless of by whom guidelines are released, they are not likely to be utilised or implemented if those who are responsible for implementing them do not trust the source. This aspect (i.e. contextual trust) is not covered by PARIHS.