Effective implementation of research into practice: An overview of systematic reviews of the health literature

被引:163
|
作者
Boaz A. [1 ]
Baeza J. [2 ]
Fraser A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London SE1 3QD
[2] Department of Management, School of Social Science and Public Policy, King's College London, London SE1 9NH
关键词
Systematic Review; Primary Study; Research Evidence; Opinion Leader; Strategy Type;
D O I
10.1186/1756-0500-4-212
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of interventions has been developed to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice. Findings. A review of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase the use of research in clinical practice. A search for relevant systematic reviews was conducted of Medline and the Cochrane Database of Reviews 1998-2009. 13 systematic reviews containing 313 primary studies were included. Four strategy types are identified: audit and feedback; computerised decision support; opinion leaders; and multifaceted interventions. Nine of the reviews reported on multifaceted interventions. This review highlights the small effects of single interventions such as audit and feedback, computerised decision support and opinion leaders. Systematic reviews of multifaceted interventions claim an improvement in effectiveness over single interventions, with effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. This review found that a number of published systematic reviews fail to state whether the recommended practice change is based on the best available research evidence. Conclusions: This overview of systematic reviews updates the body of knowledge relating to the effectiveness of key mechanisms for improving clinical practice and service development. Multifaceted interventions are more likely to improve practice than single interventions such as audit and feedback. This review identified a small literature focusing explicitly on getting research evidence into clinical practice. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring that primary studies and systematic reviews are precise about the extent to which the reported interventions focus on changing practice based on research evidence (as opposed to other information codified in guidelines and education materials). © 2011 Boaz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Effectiveness and implementation of models of cancer survivorship care: an overview of systematic reviews
    Chan, Raymond J.
    Crawford-Williams, Fiona
    Crichton, Megan
    Joseph, Ria
    Hart, Nicolas H.
    Milley, Kristi
    Druce, Paige
    Zhang, Jianrong
    Jefford, Michael
    Lisy, Karolina
    Emery, Jon
    Nekhlyudov, Larissa
    JOURNAL OF CANCER SURVIVORSHIP, 2023, 17 (01) : 197 - 221
  • [42] Reviewing Research Evidence for Nursing Practice: Systematic Reviews
    Rattray, Janice
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2009, 18 (07) : 1081 - 1081
  • [43] Seeking effective interventions to treat complex wounds: an overview of systematic reviews
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    Antony, Jesmin
    Vafaei, Afshin
    Khan, Paul A.
    Harrington, Alana
    Cogo, Elise
    Wilson, Charlotte
    Perrier, Laure
    Hui, Wing
    Straus, Sharon E.
    BMC MEDICINE, 2015, 13
  • [44] Seeking effective interventions to treat complex wounds: an overview of systematic reviews
    Andrea C Tricco
    Jesmin Antony
    Afshin Vafaei
    Paul A Khan
    Alana Harrington
    Elise Cogo
    Charlotte Wilson
    Laure Perrier
    Wing Hui
    Sharon E Straus
    BMC Medicine, 13
  • [45] Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research
    Hiebl, Martin R. W.
    ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2023, 26 (02) : 229 - 261
  • [46] Systematic literature reviews: Four applications for interdisciplinary research
    Burgers, Christian
    Brugman, Britta C.
    Boeynaems, Amber
    JOURNAL OF PRAGMATICS, 2019, 145 : 102 - 109
  • [47] Is general practice effective?: A systematic literature review
    Engström, S
    Foldevi, M
    Borgquist, L
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE, 2001, 19 (02) : 131 - 144
  • [48] QUALITY OF SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEWS OF HEALTH ECONOMIC MODELS
    Smela, B.
    Lukiewicz, B.
    Gawlik, K.
    Clay, E.
    Boyer, L.
    Toumi, M.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2024, 27 (06) : S396 - S396
  • [49] Balance and functional training and health in adults: an overview of systematic reviews
    McLaughlin, Emily Claire
    El-Kotob, Rasha
    Chaput, Jean-Philippe
    Janssen, Ian
    Kho, Michelle E.
    Poitras, Veronica J.
    Ross, Robert
    Ross-White, Amanda
    Saunders, Travis J.
    Sherrington, Catherine
    Giangregorio, Lora M.
    APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY NUTRITION AND METABOLISM, 2020, 45 (10) : S180 - S196
  • [50] Exercise therapy for bone and muscle health: an overview of systematic reviews
    Hagen, Kare Birger
    Dagfinrud, Hanne
    Moe, Rikke Helene
    Osteras, Nina
    Kjeken, Ingvild
    Grotle, Margreth
    Smedslund, Geir
    BMC MEDICINE, 2012, 10