Aligning implementation research and clinical operations: a partnership to promote implementation research in primary care.

IF 1.3 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Valerie Chepp, Steven Masiano, Mario Scarcipino, Audrey Hudak, Eva Steinel, Christopher Babiuch, Anita D Misra-Hebert
{"title":"Aligning implementation research and clinical operations: a partnership to promote implementation research in primary care.","authors":"Valerie Chepp, Steven Masiano, Mario Scarcipino, Audrey Hudak, Eva Steinel, Christopher Babiuch, Anita D Misra-Hebert","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002879","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rigorous evaluation of the implementation of evidence into routine practice in a health system requires strong alignment between research and clinical operational teams. Implementation researchers benefit from understanding operational processes and contextual factors when designing data collection while operational teams gain an understanding of implementation frameworks and outcomes using both qualitative and quantitative data. However, interventions to build capacity for these evaluation partnerships-particularly those tailored for clinical operational practitioners-are limited. We developed a model for a research-clinical operational partnership to build capacity for rigorous implementation evaluation. The model incorporated didactic and interactive education alongside small group discussion. Using reflective qualitative analysis, we show how the year-long partnership resulted in an effective collaboration that built capacity for rigorous operational evaluation, informed plans for data collection to include provider and patient barriers to adoption and increased awareness of implementation cost barriers. Improved capacity for implementation evaluation was demonstrated by the knowledge acquisition that resulted for both teams as a result of the collaboration and the education that penetrated to other aspects of the operational team's work beyond the immediate project. Programme successes and improvement opportunities were also identified. The partnership model shows how a formal research-clinical operational collaboration can build capacity for rigorous implementation evaluation and close the gap between implementation researchers and practitioners in a large health system. While larger-scale process evaluation is common, creating space for project-specific capacity-building initiatives, with varying levels of research involvement, can also advance the field of implementation science, offering new perspectives and partnerships, as well as opportunities to advance learning even for smaller-scale evidence translation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":"13 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11555095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002879","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rigorous evaluation of the implementation of evidence into routine practice in a health system requires strong alignment between research and clinical operational teams. Implementation researchers benefit from understanding operational processes and contextual factors when designing data collection while operational teams gain an understanding of implementation frameworks and outcomes using both qualitative and quantitative data. However, interventions to build capacity for these evaluation partnerships-particularly those tailored for clinical operational practitioners-are limited. We developed a model for a research-clinical operational partnership to build capacity for rigorous implementation evaluation. The model incorporated didactic and interactive education alongside small group discussion. Using reflective qualitative analysis, we show how the year-long partnership resulted in an effective collaboration that built capacity for rigorous operational evaluation, informed plans for data collection to include provider and patient barriers to adoption and increased awareness of implementation cost barriers. Improved capacity for implementation evaluation was demonstrated by the knowledge acquisition that resulted for both teams as a result of the collaboration and the education that penetrated to other aspects of the operational team's work beyond the immediate project. Programme successes and improvement opportunities were also identified. The partnership model shows how a formal research-clinical operational collaboration can build capacity for rigorous implementation evaluation and close the gap between implementation researchers and practitioners in a large health system. While larger-scale process evaluation is common, creating space for project-specific capacity-building initiatives, with varying levels of research involvement, can also advance the field of implementation science, offering new perspectives and partnerships, as well as opportunities to advance learning even for smaller-scale evidence translation.

统一实施研究和临床操作:促进初级保健实施研究的伙伴关系。
要对医疗系统中将证据应用于常规实践的情况进行严格评估,就需要研究团队与临床操作团队紧密配合。在设计数据收集时,实施研究人员可以从对操作流程和背景因素的了解中获益,而操作团队则可以通过定性和定量数据了解实施框架和结果。然而,培养这些评估伙伴关系能力的干预措施,尤其是为临床操作从业人员量身定制的干预措施非常有限。我们开发了一种研究与临床操作合作模式,以培养严格的实施评估能力。该模式结合了说教和互动教育以及小组讨论。通过反思性定性分析,我们展示了长达一年的合作如何产生有效的合作,从而建立严格的操作评估能力,为数据收集计划提供信息,包括提供者和患者在采用过程中遇到的障碍,以及提高对实施成本障碍的认识。通过合作,两个团队都获得了知识,教育也渗透到了业务团队工作的其他方面,而不仅仅是眼前的项目,这些都证明了实施评估能力的提高。还确定了计划的成功之处和改进机会。这种伙伴关系模式表明,正式的研究与临床业务合作如何能够建设严格的实施评估能力,并缩小大型卫生系统中实施研究人员与从业人员之间的差距。虽然较大规模的过程评估很常见,但为具体项目的能力建设倡议创造空间,并让不同程度的研究人员参与其中,也能推动实施科学领域的发展,提供新的视角和伙伴关系,并为较小规模的证据转化提供推进学习的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ Open Quality Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信