Search

Background Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) promote the conduct of research in real-world settings by engaging primary care clinicians as champion research collaborators. Card studies are brief surveys administered to patients or clinicians at the point of care. The objective of this paper is to describe the design and evaluation of a card study methodology that the WWAMI Region Practice and Research Network (WPRN) used to develop research partnerships across multiple member sites. Methods We used a collaborative model to develop, implement and disseminate the results of a network-wide card study to assess patient preferences for weight loss in primary care. After the card study data collection was completed, we conducted individual and focus group interviews and a brief survey of participating practice champions. Results Increased research engagement and personal and professional developments were the primary motivators for participating in the development of the card study. Increasing research activity at practices and learning information about patients were motivators for implementing the study. Their participation resulted in champions reporting increased confidence in collaborating on research projects as well as the development of new clinical services for patients. Discussion This collaborative model positively influenced research capacity in the WPRN and may be a useful strategy for helping PBRNs conducted translational research.

Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) promote the conduct of research in real-world settings by engaging primary care clinicians as champion research collaborators. Card studies are brief surveys administered to patients or clinicians at the point of care. The objective of this paper is to describe the design and evaluation of a card study methodology that the WWAMI Region Practice and Research Network (WPRN) used to develop research partnerships across multiple member sites.We used a collaborative model to develop, implement and disseminate the results of a network-wide card study to assess patient preferences for weight loss in primary care. After the card study data collection was completed, we conducted individual and focus group interviews and a brief survey of participating practice champions.Increased research engagement and personal and professional developments were the primary motivators for participating in the development of the card study. Increasing research activity at practices and learning information about patients were motivators for implementing the study. Their participation resulted in champions reporting increased confidence in collaborating on research projects as well as the development of new clinical services for patients.This collaborative model positively influenced research capacity in the WPRN and may be a useful strategy for helping PBRNs conducted translational research.

A fundamental long-term goal of the Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) program is to improve patient outcomes for typical patients in community practice settings by speeding the often slow and ineffective translation of research findings into practice.1,2 Improving patient outcomes has also been the focus of practice-based quality improvement (QI) programs,3 suggesting that integrating QI and outcomes research holds promise for implementing and disseminating successful interventions.4,5 Despite commonalities between QI and research, there are also differences.6,7 Unlike research, QI programs generally do not employ rigorous and more time consuming research methodologies that support generalizing the interventions and results to other practices. Research emphasizes discovery, while QI focuses on application, such as systems change and clinical outcomes.8 Also, research is designed to produce new knowledge, whereas QI generates knowledge to address an internal organizational concern.9 Developing a practice-based research network (PBRN) with a model that integrates research and QI builds on the existing strengths of QI efforts, adding research incrementally rather than building a research program from the ground up. PBRNs provide an avenue for bringing research into practice2,7 and encourage a collaborative approach between researchers and clinicians.10 Participatory approaches that combine QI and research are more likely to be relevant, tailored, and actionable to practitioners. Clinical practices may be more likely to engage in research that directly affects their patient care mission. Moreover, clinicians who participate in knowledge generation may be more likely to adopt the research results.2,8 To advance the integration of QI and research in PBRNs, we present a case study of a combined research/QI intervention in a nascent primary care PBRN, illuminating differences in research and QI methods as well as the challenges and strengths of the combined approach. This description of the key elements and measures of success for the integrated model may inform investigators considering this approach.

This project aimed to develop an open-access website providing adaptable resources to facilitate best practices for multisite research from initiation to closeout. methods: A web-based assessment was sent to the leadership of the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Community Engagement Key Functions Committee (n= 38) and the CTSA-affiliated Primary Care Practice-based Research Networks (PBRN, n= 55). Respondents rated the benefits and barriers of multisite research, the utility of available resources, and indicated their level of interest in unavailable resources. Then, existing research resources were evaluated for relevance to multisite research, adaptability to other projects, and source credibility.Fifty-five (59%) of invited participants completed the survey. Top perceived benefits of multisite research were the ability to conduct community-relevant research through academic-community partnerships (34%) and accelerating translation of research into practice (31%). Top perceived barriers were lack of research infrastructure to support PBRNs and community partners (31%) and inadequate funding to support multisite collaborations (26%). Over 200 resources were evaluated, of which 120 unique resources were included in the website.The PRIMER Research Toolkit (http://www.researchtoolkit.org) provides an array of peer-reviewed resources to facilitate translational research for the conduct of multisite studies within PBRNs and community-based organizations.

Over the past two decades, the health research enterprise has matured rapidly, and many recognize an urgent need to translate pertinent research results into practice, to help improve the quality, accessibility, and affordability of US healthcare. Streamlining research operations would speed translation, particularly for multisite collaborations. However, the culture of research discourages reusing or adapting existing resources or study materials. Too often, researchers start studies and multisite collaborations from scratch—reinventing the wheel. Our team developed a compendium of resources to address inefficiencies and researchers’ unmet needs and compiled them in a research toolkit website (http://www.ResearchToolkit.org). Through our work, we identified philosophical and operational issues related to disseminating the tool kit to the research community. We explore these issues here, with implications for the nation’s investment in biomedical research. Clin Trans Sci 2011; Volume 4: 266–267