Search

Wendy Gifford,1 Ian D Graham,2,3 Mark G Ehrhart,4 Barbara L Davies,5,6 Gregory A Aarons7 1School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, ON, Canada; 2Centre for Practice-Changing Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 3School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Facility of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; 4Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA; 5Nursing Best Practice Research Center, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; 6Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; 7Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA Purpose: Leadership in health care is instrumental to creating a supportive organizational environment and positive staff attitudes for implementing evidence-based practices to improve patient care and outcomes. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the alignment of the Ottawa Model of Implementation Leadership (O-MILe), a theoretical model for developing implementation leadership, with the Implementation Leadership Scale (ILS), an empirically validated tool for measuring implementation leadership. A secondary objective is to describe the methodological process for aligning concepts of a theoretical model with an independently established measurement tool for evaluating theory-based interventions.Methods: Modified template analysis was conducted to deductively map items of the ILS onto concepts of the O-MILe. An iterative process was used in which the model and scale developers (n=5) appraised the relevance, conceptual clarity, and fit of each ILS items with the O-MILe concepts through individual feedback and group discussions until consensus was reached.Results: All 12 items of the ILS correspond to at least one O-MILe concept, demonstrating compatibility of the ILS as a measurement tool for the O-MILe theoretical constructs.Conclusion: The O-MILe provides a theoretical basis for developing implementation leadership, and the ILS is a compatible tool for measuring leadership based on the O-MILe. Used together, the O-MILe and ILS provide an evidence- and theory-based approach for developing and measuring leadership for implementing evidence-based practices in health care. Template analysis offers a convenient approach for determining the compatibility of independently developed evaluation tools to test theoretical models. Keywords: leadership, implementation, evidence-based practice, template analysis, theoretical models, leadership development, knowledge translation

Abstract Background Numerous agencies have developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The study objective was to conduct a systematic assessment of the quality of osteoporosis guidelines produced since 1998. Methods Guidelines were identified by searching MEDLINE (1998+), the world wide web, known guideline developer websites, bibliographies of retrieved guidelines, and through consultation with content experts. Each guideline was then assessed by three independent appraisers using the 'Appraisal Instrument for Clinical Guidelines' (version 1) by Cluzeau. Results We identified 26 unique guidelines from 1998–2001 and 21 met our inclusion criteria. Of the 21 guidelines reviewed, 8 were developed by medical societies, 6 by national groups, 6 by government agencies, and 1 by an international group. Twelve of the guidelines were published, 7 were organizational reports, and 2 were accessible only from the web. Half or more of the 20 items assessing the rigor of guideline development were met by 15% (median quality score 23%, range 5–80%, (95% CI 16.5, 34.7)), 81% met at least half of the 12 items assessing guideline content and context (median score 58%, range 17–83%, (95% CI 50.8, 65.5)), and none met half or more of the items assessing guideline application (median score 0%, range 0–47%, (95% CI -0.5 to 12.6)). Eight guidelines described the method used to assess the strength of evidence, and in 6 there was an explicit link between recommendations and the supporting evidence. Ten guidelines were judged not suitable for use in practice, 10 were acceptable with modification, and one was acceptable for use without modification. Conclusion The methodological quality of current osteoporosis guidelines is low, although their scores for clinical content were higher. Virtually no guidelines covered dissemination issues. Few guidelines were judged as acceptable for use in their current format.

OBJECTIVE: The Preparation for Decision Making (PrepDM) scale was developed to evaluate decision processes relating to the preparation of patients for decision making and dialoguing with their practitioners. The objective of this study was to evaluate the scale's psychometric properties. METHODS: From July 2005 to March 2006, after viewing a decision aid prescribed during routine clinical care, patients completed a questionnaire including: demographic information, treatment intention, decisional conflict, decision aid acceptability, and the PrepDM scale. RESULTS: Four hundred orthopaedic patients completed the questionnaire. The PrepDM scale showed significant correlation with the informed (r=-0.21, p<0.01) and support (r=-0.13, p=0.01) subscales (DCS); and discriminated significantly between patients who did and did not find the decision aid helpful (p<0.0001). Alpha coefficients for internal consistency ranged from 0.92 to 0.96. The scale is strongly unidimensional (principal components analysis) and Item Response Theory analyses demonstrated that all ten scale items function very well. CONCLUSION: The psychometric properties of the PrepDM scale are very good. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The scale could allow more comprehensive evaluation of interventions designed to prepare patients for shared-decision making encounters regarding complex health care decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic surgery may become the standard of care for the treatment of colorectal disease. Little is known regarding North American patterns of practice or the limiting factors and strategies for adoption among surgeons.Methods: We sent a 28-item questionnaire to all general surgeon members of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. We derived descriptive and correlative information using chi(2), Wilcoxon rank sum and Student t tests and multivariate logistic regression.Results: The return rate was 55% (694/1266). A total of 67% (462/694; 95% confidence interval 63%-70%) of respondents perform colorectal surgery. Of these, 54% perform laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Multivariate logistic regression identified 5 factors related to performing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: fewer years in practice (p < 0.001), male sex (p = 0.015), practising in the province of Quebec (p = 0.005), university-hospital affiliation (p = 0.034) and minimally invasive surgery fellowship training (p = 0.023). Lack of adequate operating time and formal training were the main reasons cited by surgeons not offering laparoscopic colon resections. Most surgeons (67%) felt that site visits from a minimally invasive surgeon would represent the most effective training method for acquiring advanced laparoscopic skills.Conclusion: About half of Canadian general surgeons offer laparoscopic colorectal resections. Recent graduation, male sex, practice location, university-hospital affiliation and minimally invasive surgery training are significant predictors for offering a laparoscopic approach. Lack of operative time and formal training are the main barriers to adoption of the technique. Site visits by trained laparoscopic surgeons is the preferred method of acquiring advanced skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each year more than 50,000 Canadians experience a stroke and more than 300,000 currently live with its effects. Despite the evidence supporting best practices in stroke care, significant gaps in translating this knowledge into action remains in Canada. An interdisciplinary working group of the Canadian Stroke Strategy was formed to develop best-practice recommendations relevant to Canadian health care. The working group used a rigorous process to develop the guidelines, which included reviewing existing stroke recommendations and research literature, and consulting a national interprofessional consensus panel. The Canadian Best Practice Recommendations for Stroke Care consist of 24 recommendations based on the strongest evidence and address topics that span the full continuum of stroke care. Implementation and dissemination of these recommendations is in progress. Bringing about change will require political will and collaboration throughout the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: To quantify practice changes associated with implementing a clinical practice guideline for the second stage of labor in term nulliparous women with epidural anesthesia and to describe the lessons learned about knowledge translation. The main clinical practice guideline recommendation was waiting up to 2 hours before pushing after full dilatation. DESIGN AND METHODS: Pre- and post-evaluation of clinical outcomes and knowledge translation strategies associated with implementing the second stage of labor clinical practice guideline at two birthing units within a large teaching hospital. RESULTS: The implementation of the clinical practice guideline resulted in a significant increase in median waiting time before pushing of 33 minutes at Site 1. This change was also reflected in the twofold increase in the proportion of women waiting longer than 120 minutes before pushing at this site. There was no change in waiting time at Site 2. The duration of the second stage did not change significantly at either site. The median pushing time decreased at both sites but was only statistically significant at Site 1. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Bringing about practice change in obstetrics is complex. The measured change in this study was less than we expected. Greater success might have been achieved by enhancing feedback to care providers and more frequent audits of practice. We need to better understand the subtle influences in attitude and culture that prevented successful implementation in one site. For units considering a similar process, we recommend a commensurately greater level of presence in the units to encourage compliance with the clinical practice guideline in order to achieve the desired level of practice change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Clinical practice guidelines are intended to improve patient care and outcomes. Controversy exists about the utility of guidelines and doctors' attitudes toward them. The purpose of the survey was to determine Ontario doctors' attitudes toward practice guidelines in general, awareness of, and attitudes about, Cancer Care Ontario's Practice Guideline Initiative and the evidence-based guidelines it produces, self-reported use of guidelines and, factors related to guideline use. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, self-administered postal survey of 1034 Ontario doctors who treat cancer. Main outcome measures were attitudes toward practice guidelines in general, attitudes towards those developed by Cancer Care Ontario's Practice Guideline Initiative, and self-reported use of practice guidelines. Findings A total of 520 doctors responded producing a 57% survey response rate. Ontario doctors are quite positive about practice guidelines in general and those developed by Cancer Care Ontario. Forty-four per cent reported using guidelines routinely or most of the time. Positive attitudes towards guidelines in general and the Ontario cancer guidelines specifically were related to more frequent reported use of guidelines. Other factors related to frequent reported use of guidelines included being a medical oncologist, treating gynaecological cancers and not other types of cancers. Interpretation Ontario doctors have positive attitudes toward practice guidelines and report frequent use of them. By understanding the relationship between doctors' perceptions of specific guidelines and their subsequent adherence to them, guideline developers will be better positioned to produce quality evidence-based guidelines that doctors will find acceptable, and therefore, be more predisposed to use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) provides a process that facilitates shared decision making. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of implementing the ODSF on the agreement and the difference between patients' and physicians' decisional conflict scores. DESIGN: In total, 120 physicians and 903 patients enrolled in this before-and-after study. Implementation of the ODSF was composed of an interactive workshop, feedback, and a reminder at the point of care. The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) was completed by physicians and patients after a clinical encounter. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient was-0.205 +/- 0.096 (95% confidence interval [CI]= - 0.224 to -0.186) before implementing the ODSF and- 0.013 +/- 0.114 (95% CI = - 0.036 to 0.009) after. At the patient level, the following factors were significantly associated with the difference between the patients' and physicians' DCS: unemployed (P = 0.023), implementing the ODSF (P = 0.008), high school degree (P = 0.04), male (P = 0.03), and unilateral role in decision making (P = 0.03). At the physician level, provincial committee (P = 0.001), national committee (P = 0.045), clinical site (P = 0.016), reluctance to share uncertainty (P = 0.023), and anxiety due to uncertainty (P = 0.017) were significantly associated with this outcome. CONCLUSION: After implementing the ODSF, there was less dissimilarity between patients' and physicians' DSC than expected by chance than before. Implementing the ODSF was also found to be associated with the difference between patients' and physicians' DSC. The physician level explained a significant amount of the variance in this outcome, thus emphasizing the importance of an intervention at this level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE We sought to evaluate the impact of the gluten-free diet on the 5,240 members of the Canadian Celiac Association (CCA). Data are presented on 2,681 adults (>or=16 years) with biopsy-proven celiac disease (CD). METHODS: A mail-out survey was used. Quality of life was evaluated using the 'SF12', and celiac-specific questions. RESULTS: Mean age was 56 years, mean age at diagnosis was 45 years, and 75% were female. The 'SF12' summary scores were similar to normative Canadian data, but were significantly lower for females and newly diagnosed patients. Respondents reported: following a gluten-free (GF) diet (90%), improvement on the diet (83%), and difficulties following the diet (44%), which included: determining if foods were GF (85%), finding GF foods in stores (83%), avoiding restaurants (79%), and avoiding travel (38%). Most common reactions to consumed gluten (among 73%) included pain, diarrhea, bloating, fatigue, nausea, and headache. Excellent information on CD and its treatment was provided by the CCA (64%), gastroenterologists (28%), dietitians (26%) and family doctor (12%). CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life in those with CD could be increased with early diagnosis, increased availability of gluten-free foods, improved food labelling, and better dietary instruction. Education of physicians and dietitians about CD and its treatment is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Many health professionals, including occupational therapists, have difficulty utilizing research findings in daily practice. Purpose. To determine if an online action research project could enhance research use among occupational therapists working in similar practice areas. Methods. Four groups of 12-14 occupational therapists met online for approximately one year. They discussed barriers and facilitators to research utilization, defined practice questions,and attempted to search for, synthesize and apply relevant research findings. Online communications and post-group interviews were thematically analyzed. Results. Only half of the participants who began the project were still online with the research project at completion. These participants believed that their involvement in the group led to increased personal awareness,motivation and confidence regarding the use of research evidence in practice and knowledge to be used in practice. Time to review, critique and synthesize research evidence continued to be a major barrier to enhanced research utilization. Practice Implications. Online meetings designed to enhance research use among occupational therapists appear to hold some promise, but refinements are needed to ensure their ultimate success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study objective was to investigate physicians' perceptions of three patient decision aids (DA). Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 20 family physicians and 12 gynecologists about a DA for women considering long-term hormone replacement therapy; with 16 respirologists about a DA for the use of intubation and mechanical ventilation for patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and with 19 physicians (geriatricians, gastroenterologists, internists) about a DA for long-term placement of feeding tubes in the elderly. Participants were identified by a snowball sampling technique. The interviews were analyzed using standard qualitative methods. Most participants (81%) indicated some willingness to use the DAs. The characteristics of the DA viewed positively included it being: balanced, well organized, a useful tool, evidence-based, improves decision making process and multimedia. Some of the negative characteristics were stated as: too complex, the cost, the availability, only appropriate for certain groups of patients, and time consuming. The DAs were acceptable to most participants. Perceived positive and negative factors were similar for all DAs. Uptake of decision aids may be facilitated if physicians have an opportunity to examine and try them, and if they can have unfettered access to them for distribution purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) is defined as a process by which a healthcare choice is made by practitioners together with the patient. Although many diagnostic and therapeutic processes in primary care integrate more than one type of health professional, most SDM conceptual models and theories appear to be limited to the patient-physician dyad. The objectives of this study are to develop a conceptual model and propose a set of measurement tools for enhancing an interprofessional approach to SDM in primary healthcare. Methods/Design: An inventory of SDM conceptual models, theories and measurement tools will be created. Models will be critically assessed and compared according to their strengths, limitations, acknowledgement of interprofessional roles in the process of SDM and relevance to primary care. Based on the theory analysis, a conceptual model and a set of measurements tools that could be used to enhance an interprofessional approach to SDM in primary healthcare will be proposed and pilot-tested with key stakeholders and primary healthcare teams. Discussion: This study protocol is informative for researchers and clinicians interested in designing and/or conducting future studies and educating health professionals to improve how primary healthcare teams foster active participation of patients in making health decisions using a more coordinated approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To describe primary health care professionals' views on barriers and facilitators for implementing the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) in their practice. METHODS: Thirteen focus groups with 118 primary health care professionals were performed. A taxonomy of barriers and facilitators to implementing clinical practice guidelines was used to content-analyse the following sources: reports from each workshop, field notes from the principal investigator and written materials collected from the participants. RESULTS: Applicability of the ODSF to the practice population, process outcome expectation, asking patients about their preferred role in decision making, perception that the ODSF was modifiable, time issues, familiarity with the ODSF and its practicability were the most frequently identified both as barriers as well as facilitators. Forgetting about the ODSF, interpretation of evidence, challenge to autonomy and total lack of agreement with using the ODSF in general were identified only as barriers. Asking about values, health professional's outcome expectation, compatibility with the patient-centered approach or the evidence-based approach, ease of understanding and implementation, and ease of communicating the ODSF were identified only as facilitators. CONCLUSION: These results provide insight on the type of interventions that could be developed in order to implement the ODSF in academic primary care practice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Interventions to implement the ODSF in primary care practice will need to address a broad range of factors at the levels of the health professionals, the patients and the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this secondary analysis was to compare the effects of a tailored decision aid (DA) with those of a pamphlet on the agreement between women's and physicians' decisional conflict about hormone replacement therapy (HRT). A total of 40 physicians and 184 women provided data. The agreement between women's and physicians' decisional conflict scores was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The ICC was higher for dyads in the DA group (ICC=0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.25-0.59) compared to the pamphlet group (ICC=0.28; 95% CI=0.06-0.47). When the average score of decisional conflict of women nested within a physician and of each physician were used, the ICC for the DA group and the pamphlet group was 0.41 (95% CI=-0.04 to 0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI=-0.41 to 0.49), respectively. Compared to pamphlets, DAs appear to improve the agreement between women's and physicians' decisional conflict about HRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To update a systematic review on the barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice as perceived by health professionals. METHODS: From March to December 2006, PubMed, Embase, CINHAL, PsycINFO, and Dissertation Abstracts were searched. Studies were included if they reported on health professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in practice. Quality of the included studies was assessed. Content analysis was performed with a pre-established taxonomy. RESULTS: Out of 1130 titles, 10 new eligible studies were identified for a total of 38 included studies compared to 28 in the previous version. The vast majority of participants (n=3231) were physicians (89%). The three most often reported barriers were: time constraints (22/38) and lack of applicability due to patient characteristics (18/38) and the clinical situation (16/38). The three most often reported facilitators were: provider motivation (23/38) and positive impact on the clinical process (16/38) and patient outcomes (16/38). CONCLUSION: This systematic review update confirms the results of the original review. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Interventions to foster implementation of shared decision-making in clinical practice will need to address a range of factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To appraise instruments used as primary outcome measures in trials measuring the effectiveness of patient decision support interventions. METHODS: Primary outcome measures were identified in trials of patient decision aids included in the 2003 Cochrane Review. Instruments were appraised for: use in calculating sample size, appropriateness, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, acceptability, and feasibility. RESULTS: Of the 35 trials, there were 35 unique primary outcome measures and 8 instruments were appraised. Actual or preferred choice was the primary outcome measure in 18 trials. Two instruments met at least 6 of 8 appraisal criteria: Control Preference Scale (n=2 trials) and Decisional Conflict Scale (n=5 trials). The Decision Conflict Scale was used to calculate sample size in 4 trials. CONCLUSION: Decision was the most consistent outcome measure. Most publications provided inadequate detail for appraising the instruments. Four instruments (Decisional Conflict, Control Preferences, Genetic Testing Knowledge Questionnaire, and McBride's Satisfaction with Decision) measured one or more International Patient Decision Aid Standards criteria for evaluating effectiveness. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Selecting relevant and high quality outcome measures remains challenging and is an important area for further research in the field of shared decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to describe how selected health research funding agencies active in low- and middle-income countries promote the translation of their funded research into policy and practice. METHODS: We conducted inductive analysis of semi-structured interviews with key informants from a purposive sample of 23 national and international funding agencies that fund health research in Brazil, Colombia, India, the Philippines, South Africa and Thailand. We also surveyed web sites. FINDINGS: We found a commitment to knowledge translation in the mandate of 18 of 23 agencies. However, there was a lack of common terminology. Most of the activities were traditional efforts to disseminate to a broad audience, for example using web sites and publications. In addition, more than half (13 of 23) of the agencies encouraged linkage/exchange between researchers and potential users, and 6 of 23 agencies described 'pull' activities to generate interest in research from decision-makers. One-third (9 of 23) of funding agencies described a mandate to enhance health equity through improving knowledge translation. Only 3 of 23 agencies were able to describe evaluation of knowledge translation activities. Furthermore, we found national funding agencies made greater knowledge translation efforts when compared to international agencies. CONCLUSION: Funding agencies are engaged in a wide range of creative knowledge translation activities. They might consider their role as knowledge brokers, with an ability to promote research syntheses and a focus on health equity. There is an urgent need to evaluate the knowledge translation activities of funding agencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As patients become more involved in decisions affecting their health, it is important to monitor and improve the support clinicians provide to facilitate shared decision making. The Decision Support Analysis Tool (DSAT) was developed as a research tool to evaluate practitioners' use of decision support and related communication skills during a clinical encounter. The DSAT, consisting of six categories of decision support skills and four categories of communication skills, was tested with 34 actual transcripts of patient-physician dialogue. The patients were prepared for the clinical encounter with either a detailed decision aid plus worksheet (n=16) or a pamphlet (n=18). Pairs of raters, blinded to the intervention allocation, coded each transcript independently. The overall inter-rater agreement and kappa coefficients were, respectively 75% and 0.59 for the decision support skills and 76% and 0.68 for the communication skills categories. The frequency of DSAT skills coded: (a) were significantly correlated with three out of six patient and physician outcome measures (r>0.30, P<0.05); and (b) showed significant discrimination (P=0.05) or trends (P<0.15) in discrimination between the decision aid and pamphlet groups. The DSAT shows promise as a reliable and valid evaluation tool but requires further testing with larger samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]