Jo Rycroft-Malone

Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges

BackgroundThe 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.DiscussionThis 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.SummaryThe 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.

The PARIHS framework--a framework for guiding the implementation of evidence-based practice.

We are living in an exciting era in wiiich we have a much more extensive body of nursing research than in the past decades upon which to base nursing practice. Aithough there remain many aspects of patient care for which iittle research is available, our literature contains a wealth of knowledge applicable to practice. The purpose of this column in the Journal of Nursing Care Quality is to present practical information for direct-care nurses and quality improvement leaders about using the best available evidence to change practice. This column is coordinated by June H. Larrabee, PhD, RN, at jhlarrabee@adelphia.net; jlarrabee@hsc.wvu.edu.

The role of evidence, context, and facilitation in an implementation trial: implications for the development of the PARIHS framework

BackgroundThe case has been made for more and better theory-informed process evaluations within trials in an effort to facilitate insightful understandings of how interventions work. In this paper, we provide an explanation of implementation processes from one of the first national implementation research randomized controlled trials with embedded process evaluation conducted within acute care, and a proposed extension to the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework.MethodsThe PARIHS framework was prospectively applied to guide decisions about intervention design, data collection, and analysis processes in a trial focussed on reducing peri-operative fasting times. In order to capture a holistic picture of implementation processes, the same data were collected across 19 participating hospitals irrespective of allocation to intervention. This paper reports on findings from data collected from a purposive sample of 151 staff and patients pre- and post-intervention. Data were analysed using content analysis within, and then across data sets.ResultsA robust and uncontested evidence base was a necessary, but not sufficient condition for practice change, in that individual staff and patient responses such as caution influenced decision making. The implementation context was challenging, in which individuals and teams were bounded by professional issues, communication challenges, power and a lack of clarity for the authority and responsibility for practice change. Progress was made in sites where processes were aligned with existing initiatives. Additionally, facilitators reported engaging in many intervention implementation activities, some of which result in practice changes, but not significant improvements to outcomes.ConclusionsThis study provided an opportunity for reflection on the comprehensiveness of the PARIHS framework. Consistent with the underlying tenant of PARIHS, a multi-faceted and dynamic story of implementation was evident. However, the prominent role that individuals played as part of the interaction between evidence and context is not currently explicit within the framework. We propose that successful implementation of evidence into practice is a planned facilitated process involving an interplay between individuals, evidence, and context to promote evidence-informed practice. This proposal will enhance the potential of the PARIHS framework for explanation, and ensure theoretical development both informs and responds to the evidence base for implementation.Trial registrationISRCTN18046709 - Peri-operative Implementation Study Evaluation (PoISE).

An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research

Seventy six senior academics from 11 countries invite The BMJ ’s editors to reconsider their policy of rejecting qualitative research on the grounds of low priority. They challenge the journal to develop a proactive, scholarly, and pluralist approach to research that aligns with its stated mission

Getting guidelines into practice: a literature review

Background Clinical guidelines have the potential to ensure that a research knowledge base underpins practice. Their development nationally and locally has increased dramatically in recent years. The challenge lies in implementing them. This literature review of guideline implementation was conducted to inform the development of implementation strategies for the Royal College of Nursing national clinical guidelines. Conclusion The evidence base for guideline implementation is still developing and many ideas and strategies require further testing. Although strategies can be developed around some core principles, as yet there is no single definitive strategy. This selective literature review offers some insight into successful implementation strategies.

FIRE (Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence): a study protocol.

BackgroundResearch evidence underpins best practice, but is not always used in healthcare. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework suggests that the nature of evidence, the context in which it is used, and whether those trying to use evidence are helped (or facilitated) affect the use of evidence. Urinary incontinence has a major effect on quality of life of older people, has a high prevalence, and is a key priority within European health and social care policy. Improving continence care has the potential to improve the quality of life for older people and reduce the costs associated with providing incontinence aids.ObjectivesThis study aims to advance understanding about the contribution facilitation can make to implementing research findings into practice via: extending current knowledge of facilitation as a process for translating research evidence into practice; evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of two different models of facilitation in promoting the uptake of research evidence on continence management; assessing the impact of contextual factors on the processes and outcomes of implementation; and implementing a pro-active knowledge transfer and dissemination strategy to diffuse study findings to a wide policy and practice community.Setting and sampleFour European countries, each with six long-term nursing care sites (total 24 sites) for people aged 60 years and over with documented urinary incontinenceMethods and designPragmatic randomised controlled trial with three arms (standard dissemination and two different programmes of facilitation), with embedded process and economic evaluation. The primary outcome is compliance with the continence recommendations. Secondary outcomes include proportion of residents with incontinence, incidence of incontinence-related dermatitis, urinary tract infections, and quality of life. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, then at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the start of the facilitation interventions. Detailed contextual and process data are collected throughout, using interviews with staff, residents and next of kin, observations, assessment of context using the Alberta Context Tool, and documentary evidence. A realistic evaluation framework is used to develop explanatory theory about what works for whom in what circumstances.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN11598502.

Leadership for Evidence‐Based Practice: Strategic and Functional Behaviors for Institutionalizing EBP

Background Making evidence-based practice (EBP) a reality throughout an organization is a challenging goal in healthcare services. Leadership has been recognized as a critical element in that process. However, little is known about the exact role and function of various levels of leadership in the successful institutionalization of EBP within an organization. Aims To uncover what leaders at different levels and in different roles actually do, and what actions they take to develop, enhance, and sustain EBP as the norm. Methods Qualitative data from a case study regarding institutionalization of EBP in two contrasting cases (Role Model and Beginner hospitals) were systematically analyzed. Data were obtained from multiple interviews of leaders, both formal and informal, and from staff nurse focus groups. A deductive coding schema, based on concepts of functional leadership, was developed for this in-depth analysis. Results Participants’ descriptions reflected a hierarchical array of strategic, functional, and cross-cutting behaviors. Within these macrolevel “themes,” 10 behavioral midlevel themes were identified; for example, Intervening and Role modeling. Each theme is distinctive, yet various themes and their subthemes were interrelated and synergistic. These behaviors and their interrelationships were conceptualized in the framework “Leadership Behaviors Supportive of EBP Institutionalization” (L-EBP). Leaders at multiple levels in the Role Model case, both formal and informal, engaged in most of these behaviors. Linking Evidence to Action Supportive leadership behaviors required for organizational institutionalization of EBP reflect a complex set of interactive, multifaceted EBP-focused actions carried out by leaders from the chief nursing officer to staff nurses. A related framework such as L-EBP may provide concrete guidance needed to underpin the often-noted but abstract finding that leaders should “support” EBP.

Study protocol for the translating research in elder care (TREC): building context through case studies in long-term care project (project two)

BackgroundThe 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.AimTo develop a robust explanation of the way organizational context mediates the use of knowledge in practice in long-term care facilities.DesignThis 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.

Yoga for reducing perceived stress and back pain at work

BACKGROUND Stress and back pain are two key factors leading to sickness absence at work. Recent research indicates that yoga can be effective for reducing perceived stress, alleviating back pain, and improving psychological well-being. AIMS To determine the effectiveness of a yoga-based intervention for reducing perceived stress and back pain at work. METHODS Participants were recruited from a British local government authority and randomized into a yoga group who received one 50 min Dru Yoga session each week for 8 weeks and a 20 min DVD for home practice and a control group who received no intervention. Baseline and end-programme measurements of self-reported stress, back pain and psychological well-being were assessed with the Perceived Stress Scale, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Positive and Negative Affect Scale. RESULTS There were 37 participants in each group. Analysis of variance and multiple linear regression showed that in comparison to the control group, the yoga group reported significant reductions in perceived stress and back pain, and a substantial improvement in psychological well-being. When compared with the control group at the end of the programme, the yoga group scores were significantly lower for perceived stress, back pain, sadness and hostility, and substantially higher for feeling self-assured, attentive and serene. CONCLUSIONS The results indicate that a workplace yoga intervention can reduce perceived stress and back pain and improve psychological well-being. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the broader efficacy of yoga for improving workplace productivity and reducing sickness absence.

A pragmatic cluster randomised trial evaluating three implementation interventions

BackgroundImplementation research is concerned with bridging the gap between evidence and practice through the study of methods to promote the uptake of research into routine practice. Good quality evidence has been summarised into guideline recommendations to show that peri-operative fasting times could be considerably shorter than patients currently experience. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three strategies for the implementation of recommendations about peri-operative fasting.MethodsA pragmatic cluster randomised trial underpinned by the PARIHS framework was conducted during 2006 to 2009 with a national sample of UK hospitals using time series with mixed methods process evaluation and cost analysis. Hospitals were randomised to one of three interventions: standard dissemination (SD) of a guideline package, SD plus a web-based resource championed by an opinion leader, and SD plus plan-do-study-act (PDSA). The primary outcome was duration of fluid fast prior to induction of anaesthesia. Secondary outcomes included duration of food fast, patients’ experiences, and stakeholders’ experiences of implementation, including influences. ANOVA was used to test differences over time and interventions.ResultsNineteen acute NHS hospitals participated. Across timepoints, 3,505 duration of fasting observations were recorded. No significant effect of the interventions was observed for either fluid or food fasting times. The effect size was 0.33 for the web-based intervention compared to SD alone for the change in fluid fasting and was 0.12 for PDSA compared to SD alone. The process evaluation showed different types of impact, including changes to practices, policies, and attitudes. A rich picture of the implementation challenges emerged, including inter-professional tensions and a lack of clarity for decision-making authority and responsibility.ConclusionsThis was a large, complex study and one of the first national randomised controlled trials conducted within acute care in implementation research. The evidence base for fasting practice was accepted by those participating in this study and the messages from it simple; however, implementation and practical challenges influenced the interventions’ impact. A set of conditions for implementation emerges from the findings of this study, which are presented as theoretically transferable propositions that have international relevance.Trial registrationISRCTN18046709 - Peri-operative Implementation Study Evaluation (POISE).