Background. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) are effective interventions to support patient involvement in health care decisions, but there is little use in practice. Our study aimed to determine subsequent PtDA use in clinical practice following published randomized controlled trials. Design. A descriptive study using an e-mail-embedded questionnaire survey targeting authors of 133 trials included in Cochrane Reviews of PtDAs (106 authors). We classified PtDA level of use as a) implementation, defined as integrating within care processes; b) dissemination to target users with planned strategies; and c) diffusion, defined as passive, unplanned spread. We conducted content analysis to identify barriers and enablers guided by the Ottawa Model of Research Use. Results. Ninety-eight authors responded (92.5%) on 108 trialed PtDAs. Reported levels of use were implementation ( n = 29; 28%), dissemination to target user(s) ( n = 9; 9%), and diffusion ( n = 7; 7%); 57 (55%) reported no uptake, and 1 had no response (1%). Barriers to use in clinical practice were identified at the level of researchers (e.g., lack of posttrial plan), PtDAs (e.g., outdated, delivery mechanism), clinicians (e.g., disagreed with PtDA use), and practice environment (e.g., infrastructure support; funding). Enablers were online delivery, organizational endorsement (e.g., professional organization, charity, government), and design for and integration into the care process. Limitations. Self-report bias and potential for recall bias. Conclusions. Only 44% of PtDA trial authors indicated some level of subsequent use following their trial. The most commonly reported barriers were lack of funding, outdated PtDAs, and clinician disagreement with PtDA use. To improve subsequent use, researchers should codesign PtDAs with end users to ensure fit with clinical practice and develop an implementation plan. National systems (e.g., platforms, endorsement, funding) can enable use.

To assess and improve pain management practices for hospitalized children in an urban tertiary pediatric teaching hospital. Methods Health Quality Ontario Quality Improvement (QI) framework informed this study. A pre (T1) – post (T2) intervention assessment included chart reviews and children/caregiver surveys to ascertain pain management practices. Information on self-reported pain intensity, painful procedures, pain treatment and satisfaction were obtained from children/caregivers. Documented pain assessment, pain scores, and pharmacological/non-pharmacological pain treatments were collected by chart review. T1 data was fed back to pediatric units to inform their decisions and pain management targets. Results At T1, 51 (58% of eligible participants) children/caregivers participated. At T2, 86 (97%) chart reviews and 51 (54%) children/caregivers surveys were completed. Most children/caregivers at T1 (78%) and T2 (80%) reported moderate to severe pain during their hospitalization. A mean of 2.6 painful procedures were documented in the previous 24 h, with the most common being needle-related procedures at both T1 and T2. Pain management strategies were infrequently used during needle-related procedures at both time points. Conclusion No improvements in pain management as measured by the T1 and T2 data occurred. Findings informed further pain management initiatives in the participating hospital.