Robin Urquhart

Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review

BackgroundIntegrated knowledge translation (IKT) refers to collaboration between researchers and decision-makers. While advocated as an approach for enhancing the relevance and use of research, IKT is challenging and inconsistently applied. This study sought to inform future IKT practice and research by synthesizing studies that empirically evaluated IKT and identifying knowledge gaps.MethodsWe performed a scoping review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2005 to 2014 for English language studies that evaluated IKT interventions involving researchers and organizational or policy-level decision-makers. Data were extracted on study characteristics, IKT intervention (theory, content, mode, duration, frequency, personnel, participants, timing from initiation, initiator, source of funding, decision-maker involvement), and enablers, barriers, and outcomes reported by studies. We performed content analysis and reported summary statistics.ResultsThirteen studies were eligible after screening 14,754 titles and reviewing 106 full-text studies. Details about IKT activities were poorly reported, and none were formally based on theory. Studies varied in the number and type of interactions between researchers and decision-makers; meetings were the most common format. All studies reported barriers and facilitators. Studies reported a range of positive and sub-optimal outcomes. Outcomes did not appear to be associated with initiator of the partnership, dedicated funding, partnership maturity, nature of decision-maker involvement, presence or absence of enablers or barriers, or the number of different IKT activities.ConclusionsThe IKT strategies that achieve beneficial outcomes remain unknown. We generated a summary of IKT approaches, enablers, barriers, conditions, and outcomes that can serve as the basis for a future review or for planning ongoing primary research. Future research can contribute to three identified knowledge gaps by examining (1) how different IKT strategies influence outcomes, (2) the relationship between the logic or theory underlying IKT interventions and beneficial outcomes, and (3) when and how decision-makers should be involved in the research process. Future IKT initiatives should more systematically plan and document their design and implementation, and evaluations should report the findings with sufficient detail to reveal how IKT was associated with outcomes.

Views of breast and colorectal cancer survivors on their routine follow-up care

OBJECTIVE Our understanding of optimum health care delivery for cancer survivors is limited by the lack of a patient-centred perspective. The objectives of the present study were to explore the views of breast and colorectal cancer survivors on their routine follow-up care, with respect to needs, preferences, and quality of follow-up, and their views on cancer specialist- compared with family physician (fp)-led follow-up care. METHODS In Nova Scotia, Canada, 23 cancer survivors (13 breast, 10 colorectal) participated in either a focus group or a one-on-one interview. Participants were asked to reflect upon their lives as cancer survivors and on the type and quality of care and support they received during the follow-up period. Each focus group or interview was transcribed verbatim, and the transcripts were audited and subjected to a thematic analysis. RESULTS SIX THEMES WERE IDENTIFIED: My care is my responsibilityHow I receive information on follow-up careI have many care needsI want to be prepared and informedThe role of my fp in my cancer experience and follow-up careThe role of media Survivors often characterized the post-primary treatment experience as lacking in information and preparation for follow-up and providing inadequate support to address many of the care needs prevalent in survivor populations. Despite valuing fp participation in follow-up care, many survivors continued to receive comfort and reassurance from specialist care. CONCLUSIONS Our findings point to the need to implement strategies that better prepare breast cancer and colorectal cancer survivors for post-treatment care and that reassure survivors of the ability of their fp to provide quality care during this period.

Exploring the interpersonal-, organization-, and system-level factors that influence the implementation and use of an innovation-synoptic reporting-in cancer care

BackgroundThe dominant method of reporting findings from diagnostic and surgical procedures is the narrative report. In cancer care, this report inconsistently provides the information required to understand the cancer and make informed patient care decisions. Another method of reporting, the synoptic report, captures specific data items in a structured manner and contains only items critical for patient care. Research demonstrates that synoptic reports vastly improve the quality of reporting. However, synoptic reporting represents a complex innovation in cancer care, with implementation and use requiring fundamental shifts in physician behaviour and practice, and support from the organization and larger system. The objective of this study is to examine the key interpersonal, organizational, and system-level factors that influence the implementation and use of synoptic reporting in cancer care.MethodsThis study involves three initiatives in Nova Scotia, Canada, that have implemented synoptic reporting within their departments/programs. Case study methodology will be used to study these initiatives (the cases) in-depth, explore which factors were barriers or facilitators of implementation and use, examine relationships amongst factors, and uncover which factors appear to be similar and distinct across cases. The cases were selected as they converge and differ with respect to factors that are likely to influence the implementation and use of an innovation in practice. Data will be collected through in-depth interviews, document analysis, observation of training sessions, and examination/use of the synoptic reporting tools. An audit will be performed to determine/quantify use. Analysis will involve production of a case record/history for each case, in-depth analysis of each case, and cross-case analysis, where findings will be compared and contrasted across cases to develop theoretically informed, generalisable knowledge that can be applied to other settings/contexts. Ethical approval was granted for this study.DiscussionThis study will contribute to our knowledge base on the multi-level factors, and the relationships amongst factors in specific contexts, that influence implementation and use of innovations such as synoptic reporting in healthcare. Such knowledge is critical to improving our understanding of implementation processes in clinical settings, and to helping researchers, clinicians, and managers/administrators develop and implement ways to more effectively integrate innovations into routine clinical care.

Expanding the PARiHS framework: thinking more broadly about context and facilitation

Background The movement of innovations (i.e., new knowledge and tools) into healthcare settings is a significant challenge. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework proposes that the successful implementation of research into practice is a function of the interaction between three elements: 1) evidence; 2) context; and 3) facilitation. The objective of this paper is to present data from a study of innovation implementation in Nova Scotia, Canada, which extends and refines our understanding of PARiHS.

Creating a Knowledge Translation Trainee Collaborative: From Conceptualization to Lessons Learned in the First Year

Trainees (e.g., graduate students, residents, fellows) are increasingly identifying knowledge translation as their research discipline. In Canada, a group of trainees have created a trainee-initiated and trainee-led national collaborative to provide a vehicle for trainees to examine the diversity of knowledge translation research and practice, and to link trainees from diverse geographical areas and disciplines. The aim of this paper is to describe our experience and lessons learned in creating the Knowledge Translation Trainee Collaborative. In this meeting report, we outline the process, challenges, and opportunities in planning and experiencing the collaboratives inaugural meeting as participant organizers, and present outcomes and learnings to date.

Knowledge brokering for healthy aging: a scoping review of potential approaches

BackgroundDeveloping a healthcare delivery system that is more responsive to the future challenges of an aging population is a priority in Canada. The World Health Organization acknowledges the need for knowledge translation frameworks in aging and health. Knowledge brokering (KB) is a specific knowledge translation approach that includes making connections between people to facilitate the use of evidence. Knowledge gaps exist about KB roles, approaches, and guiding frameworks. The objective of the scoping review is to identify and describe KB approaches and the underlying conceptual frameworks (models, theories) used to guide the approaches that could support healthy aging.MethodsLiterature searches were done in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EBM reviews (Cochrane Database of systematic reviews), CINAHL, and SCOPUS, as well as Google and Google Scholar using terms related to knowledge brokering. Titles, abstracts, and full reports were reviewed independently by two reviewers who came to consensus on all screening criteria. Documents were included if they described a KB approach and details about the underlying conceptual basis. Data about KB approach, target stakeholders, KB outcomes, and context were extracted independently by two reviewers.ResultsSearches identified 248 unique references. Screening for inclusion revealed 19 documents that described 15 accounts of knowledge brokering and details about conceptual guidance and could be applied in healthy aging contexts. Eight KB elements were detected in the approaches though not all approaches incorporated all elements. The underlying conceptual guidance for KB approaches varied. Specific KB frameworks were referenced or developed for nine KB approaches while the remaining six cited more general KT frameworks (or multiple frameworks) as guidance.ConclusionsThe KB approaches that we found varied greatly depending on the context and stakeholders involved. Three of the approaches were explicitly employed in the context of health aging. Common elements of KB approaches that could be conducted in healthy aging contexts focussed on acquiring, adapting, and disseminating knowledge and networking (linkage). The descriptions of the guiding conceptual frameworks (theories, models) focussed on linkage and exchange but varied across approaches. Future research should gather KB practitioner and stakeholder perspectives on effective practices to develop KB approaches for healthy aging.

Interventions to improve care coordination between primary healthcare and oncology care providers: a systematic review.

Coordination of patient care between primary care and oncology care providers is vital to care quality and outcomes across the cancer continuum, yet it is known to be challenging. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate current or new models of care and/or interventions aimed at improving coordination between primary care and oncology care providers for patients with adult breast and/or colorectal cancer. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination were searched for existing English language studies published between January 2000 and 15 May 2015. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies were included if they evaluated a specific model/intervention that was designed to improve care coordination between primary care and oncology care providers, for any stage of the cancer continuum, for patients with adult breast and/or colorectal cancer. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Twenty-two studies (5 systematic reviews, 6 RCTs and 11 non-randomised studies) were included and varied with respect to the targeted phase of the cancer continuum, type of model or intervention tested, and outcome measures. The majority of studies showed no statistically significant changes in any patient, provider or system outcomes. Owing to conceptual and methodological limitations in this field, the review is unable to provide specific conclusions about the most effective or preferred model/intervention to improve care coordination. Imprecise results that lack generalisability and definitiveness provide limited evidence to base the development of future interventions and policies. Trial registration number CRD42015025006.

Neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer

The use of neoadjuvant therapies has played a major role for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancers (PCs). For this group of patients, preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation has increased the likelihood of surgery with negative resection margins and overall survival. On the other hand, for patients with resectable PC, the main rationale for neoadjuvant therapy is that the overall survival with current strategies is unsatisfactory. There is a consensus that we need new treatments to improve the overall survival and quality of life of patients with PC. However, without strong scientific evidence supporting the theoretical advantages of neoadjuvant therapies, these potential benefits might turn out not to be worth the risk of tumors progression while waiting for surgery. The focus of this paper is to provide the readers an overview of the most recent evidence on this subject.

Breast and cervical cancer screening behaviours among colorectal cancer survivors in Nova Scotia.

PURPOSE We analyzed patterns and factors associated with receipt of breast and cervical cancer screening in a cohort of colorectal cancer survivors. METHODS Individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer in Nova Scotia between January 2001 and December 2005 were eligible for inclusion. Receipt of breast and cervical cancer screening was determined using administrative data. General-population age restrictions were used in the analysis (breast: 40-69 years; cervical: 21-75 years). Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess time to first screen. RESULTS Of 318 and 443 colorectal cancer survivors eligible for the breast and cervical cancer screening analysis respectively, 30.1% [95% confidence interval (ci): 21.2% to 39.0%] never received screening mammography, and 47.9% (95% ci: 37.8% to 58.0%) never received cervical cancer screening during the study period. Receipt of screening before the colorectal cancer diagnosis was strongly associated with receipt of screening after diagnosis (hazard ratio for breast cancer screening: 4.71; 95% ci: 3.42 to 6.51; hazard ratio for cervical cancer screening: 6.83; 95% ci: 4.58 to 10.16). CONCLUSIONS Many colorectal cancer survivors within general-population screening age recommendations did not receive breast and cervical cancer screening. Future research should focus on survivors who meet age recommendations for population-based cancer screening.

What is the data-defined length for short time from diagnosis to death that is associated with a low rate of palliative care enrolment for persons with colorectal cancer?

Objective Prior research has demonstrated that people who die shortly after receiving a cancer diagnosis are at increased risk for not being referred to palliative care. No previous studies have empirically derived the length of time between diagnosis and death associated with increased risk. The objective of this study was to identify the length of time between diagnosis and death associated with increased risk for non-enrolment in a palliative care programme. Methods Binary recursive partitioning was employed to derive the cut-point for the number of days from colorectal cancer diagnosis to death predictive of a high risk for non-enrolment in a palliative care programme in two health districts in Nova Scotia, Canada. The study included all adults (≥20 years) who were diagnosed with colorectal cancer in the two districts between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2005 and who died between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2008 (n=894). Results Individuals who died within 18.5 days following diagnosis were at highest risk for non-enrolment in palliative care. Of the 60 adults who died in <18.5 days, 16.7% were enrolled in a palliative care programme; of the 835 adults who died ≥18.5 days after diagnosis, 65.9% were enrolled. Conclusions This data-driven approach may be used to define the short diagnosis-to-death time frame at which individuals are at increased risk for non-enrolment in palliative care programmes. This approach allows researchers to further investigate and compare empirically-derived cut-points that identify those who die quickly and are at risk of not receiving palliative care.