53
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Understanding the Canadian adult CT head rule trial: use of the theoretical domains framework for process evaluation

      Implementation Science
      Springer Nature

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies.

          To undertake a systematic review of the effectiveness and costs of different guideline development, dissemination and implementation strategies. To estimate the resource implications of these strategies. To develop a framework for deciding when it is efficient to develop and introduce clinical guidelines. MEDLINE, Healthstar, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, EMBASE, SIGLE and the specialised register of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group. Single estimates of dichotomous process variables were derived for each study comparison based upon the primary end-point or the median measure across several reported end-points. Separate analyses were undertaken for comparisons of different types of intervention. The study also explored whether the effects of multifaceted interventions increased with the number of intervention components. Studies reporting economic data were also critically appraised. A survey to estimate the feasibility and likely resource requirements of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies in UK settings was carried out with key informants from primary and secondary care. In total, 235 studies reporting 309 comparisons met the inclusion criteria; of these 73% of comparisons evaluated multifaceted interventions, although the maximum number of replications of a specific multifaceted intervention was 11 comparisons. Overall, the majority of comparisons reporting dichotomous process data observed improvements in care; however, there was considerable variation in the observed effects both within and across interventions. Commonly evaluated single interventions were reminders, dissemination of educational materials, and audit and feedback. There were 23 comparisons of multifaceted interventions involving educational outreach. The majority of interventions observed modest to moderate improvements in care. No relationship was found between the number of component interventions and the effects of multifaceted interventions. Only 29.4% of comparisons reported any economic data. The majority of studies only reported costs of treatment; only 25 studies reported data on the costs of guideline development or guideline dissemination and implementation. The majority of studies used process measures for their primary end-point, despite the fact that only three guidelines were explicitly evidence based (and may not have been efficient). Respondents to the key informant survey rarely identified existing budgets to support guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. In general, the respondents thought that only dissemination of educational materials and short (lunchtime) educational meetings were generally feasible within current resources. There is an imperfect evidence base to support decisions about which guideline dissemination and implementation strategies are likely to be efficient under different circumstances. Decision makers need to use considerable judgement about how best to use the limited resources they have for clinical governance and related activities to maximise population benefits. They need to consider the potential clinical areas for clinical effectiveness activities, the likely benefits and costs required to introduce guidelines and the likely benefits and costs as a result of any changes in provider behaviour. Further research is required to: develop and validate a coherent theoretical framework of health professional and organisational behaviour and behaviour change to inform better the choice of interventions in research and service settings, and to estimate the efficiency of dissemination and implementation strategies in the presence of different barriers and effect modifiers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A conceptual model of emergency department crowding.

            Emergency department (ED) crowding has become a major barrier to receiving timely emergency care in the United States. Despite widespread recognition of the problem, the research and policy agendas needed to understand and address ED crowding are just beginning to unfold. We present a conceptual model of ED crowding to help researchers, administrators, and policymakers understand its causes and develop potential solutions. The conceptual model partitions ED crowding into 3 interdependent components: input, throughput, and output. These components exist within an acute care system that is characterized by the delivery of unscheduled care. The goal of the conceptual model is to provide a practical framework on which an organized research, policy, and operations management agenda can be based to alleviate ED crowding.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards.

              Clinical prediction rules are decision-making tools for clinicians, containing variables from the history, physical examination, or simple diagnostic tests. To review the quality of recently published clinical prediction rules and to suggest methodological standards for their development and evaluation. Four general medical journals were manually searched for clinical prediction rules published from 1991 through 1994. Four hundred sixty potentially eligible reports were identified, of which 30 were clinical prediction rules eligible for study. Most methodological standards could only be evaluated in 29 studies. Two investigators independently evaluated the quality of each report using a standard data sheet. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The mathematical technique was used to develop the rule, and the results of the rule were described in 100% (29/29) of the reports. All the rules but 1 (97% [28/29]) were felt to be clinically sensible. The outcomes and predictive variables were clearly defined in 83% (24/29) and 59% (17/29) of the reports, respectively. Blind assessment of outcomes and predictive variables occurred in 41% (12/29) and 79% (23/29) of the reports, respectively, and the rules were prospectively validated in 79% (11/14). Reproducibility of predictive variables was assessed in only 3% (1/29) of the reports, and the effect of the rule on clinical use was prospectively measured in only 3% (1/30). Forty-one percent (12/29) of the rules were felt to be easy to use. Although clinical prediction rules comply with some methodological criteria, for other criteria, better compliance is needed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                10.1186/1748-5908-8-25

                Comments

                Comment on this article