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.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0399-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundFacilitation is a guided interactional process that has been popularized in health care. Its popularity arises from its potential to support uptake and application of scientific knowledge that stands to improve clinical and managerial decision-making, practice, and ultimately patient outcomes and organizational performance. While this popular concept has garnered attention in health services research, we know that both the content of facilitation and its impact on knowledge implementation vary. The basis of this variation is poorly understood, and understanding is hampered by a lack of conceptual clarity.DiscussionIn this paper, we argue that our understanding of facilitation and its effects is limited in part by a lack of clear theoretical grounding. We propose a theoretical home for facilitation in organizational learning theory. Referring to extant literature on facilitation and drawing on theoretical literature, we discuss the features of facilitation that suggest its role in contributing to learning capacity. We describe how facilitation may contribute to generating knowledge about the application of new scientific knowledge in health-care organizations.SummaryFacilitation’s promise, we suggest, lies in its potential to stimulate higher-order learning in organizations through experimenting with, generating learning about, and sustaining small-scale adaptations to organizational processes and work routines. The varied effectiveness of facilitation observed in the literature is associated with the presence or absence of factors known to influence organizational learning, since facilitation itself appears to act as a learning mechanism. We offer propositions regarding the relationships between facilitation processes and key organizational learning concepts that have the potential to guide future work to further our understanding of the role that facilitation plays in learning and knowledge generation.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0323-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health care organizations are leveraging machine-learning techniques, such as artificial neural networks (ANN), to improve delivery of care at a reduced cost. Applications of ANN to diagnosis are well-known; however, ANN are increasingly used to inform health care management decisions. We provide a seminal review of the applications of ANN to health care organizational decision-making. We screened 3,397 articles from six databases with coverage of Health Administration, Computer Science and Business Administration. We extracted study characteristics, aim, methodology and context (including level of analysis) from 80 articles meeting inclusion criteria. Articles were published from 1997–2018 and originated from 24 countries, with a plurality of papers (26 articles) published by authors from the United States. Types of ANN used included ANN (36 articles), feed-forward networks (25 articles), or hybrid models (23 articles); reported accuracy varied from 50% to 100%. The majority of ANN informed decision-making at the micro level (61 articles), between patients and health care providers. Fewer ANN were deployed for intra-organizational (meso- level, 29 articles) and system, policy or inter-organizational (macro- level, 10 articles) decision-making. Our review identifies key characteristics and drivers for market uptake of ANN for health care organizational decision-making to guide further adoption of this technique.

Objectives: The concept of clinical champions has been widely promoted, yet empirically underdeveloped in health services literature. The objectives of this study are to investigate the role of the clinical champion and how it contributes to effective patient safety change.Methods: Case study design was used to examine the role of champions in the implementation of rapid response teams in two hospitals. Central themes were derived through qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with key informants.Results: Analysis revealed a typology of champions: clinical, managerial, and executive.Champions engaged in five core activities: disseminating knowledge, advocating, building relationships, navigating boundaries, and facilitating consensus. Individuals became champions by informal emergence or by formal appointment combined with informal emergence.Conclusions: This study furthered understanding of patient safety champions by revealing types, activities, and modes of emergence. Findings will allow health care professionals to use an evidence-based approach to identifying and supporting champions.iii This work is dedicated to my grandmother, Mah Mah.iv

Health Care Aides (HCAs) provide up to 80% of the direct care to older Canadians living in long term care facilities, or in their homes. They are an understudied workforce, and calls for health human resources strategies relating to these workers are, we feel, precipitous. First, we need a better understanding of the nature and scope of their work, and of the factors that shape it. Here, we discuss the evolving role of HCAs and the factors that impact how and where they work. The work of HCAs includes role-required behaviors, an increasing array of delegated acts, and extra-role behaviors like emotional support. Role boundaries, particularly instances where some workers over-invest in care beyond expected levels, are identified as one of the biggest concerns among employers of HCAs in the current cost-containment environment. A number of factors significantly impact what these workers do and where they work, including market-level differences, job mobility, and work structure. In Canada, entry into this ‘profession’ is increasingly constrained to the Home and Community Care sector, while market-level and work structure differences constrain job mobility to transitions of only the most experienced workers, to the long-term care sector. We note that this is in direct opposition to recent policy initiatives designed to encourage aging at home. Work structure influences what these workers do, and how they work; many HCAs work for three or four different agencies in order to sustain themselves and their families. Expectations with regard to HCA preparation have changed over the past decade in Canada, and training is emerging as a high priority health human resource issue. An increasing emphasis on improving quality of care and measuring performance, and on integrated team-based care delivery, has considerable implications for worker training. New models of care delivery foreshadow a need for management and leadership expertise - these workers have not historically been prepared for leadership roles. We conclude with a brief discussion of the next steps necessary to generating evidence necessary to informing a health human resource strategy relating to the provision of care to older Canadians.

This paper studies acquisitions of nursing home facilities by chains. We first test alternative 'cream-skimming' and 'turn-around' arguments concerning nursing home acquisitions. We then consider post-acquisition changes in nursing home health performance, differentiating effects of the acquisition process from those of prior strategy and performance of the acquired home and acquiring chain. Our dynamic empirical analysis of more than 5000 acquisitions by US nursing home chains from 1991 through 1997 shows that nursing home chain acquisitions are driven by a turn around logic, and that performance depends on the prior quality of the target and acquirer. Our analysis is relevant to policy on the nursing home sector, helping clarify why certain homes are acquired and how being acquired affects their residents' welfare. At a more general level, we offer insights concerning strategic factors that promote acquisition and drive expansion of service sector chains.

In this article, we respond to recent calls for increased use of evidence-based management (EBMgt) by conducting a systematic review of the literature to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a substantial literature concerning the concept of evidence-based management? (2) What is the quality of evidence (where it exists) regarding evidence-based management? and (3) Is there evidence that employing evidence-based management will improve organizational performance? We applied an assessment rubric based on ranking systems developed in evidence-based medicine to evaluate the strength of evidence. We found that a large number of articles are published on the topic, but most provide encouragement to adopt EBMgt based on opinion and anecdotal information. We call for increased research to generate stronger evidence related to the impact of EBMgt on organizational performance.

BackgroundComplexity thinking is increasingly being embraced in healthcare, which is often described as a complex adaptive system (CAS). Applying CAS to healthcare as an explanatory model for understanding the nature of the system, and to stimulate changes and transformations within the system, is valuable.Main textA seminar series on systems and complexity thinking hosted at the University of Toronto in 2016 offered a number of insights on applications of CAS perspectives to healthcare that we explore here. We synthesized topics from this series into a set of six insights on how complexity thinking fosters a deeper understanding of accepted ideas in healthcare, applications of CAS to actors within the system, and paradoxes in applications of complexity thinking that may require further debate: 1) a complexity lens helps us better understand the nebulous term “context”; 2) concepts of CAS may be applied differently when actors are cognizant of the system in which they operate; 3) actor responses to uncertainty within a CAS is a mechanism for emergent and intentional adaptation; 4) acknowledging complexity supports patient-centred intersectional approaches to patient care; 5) complexity perspectives can support ways that leaders manage change (and transformation) in healthcare; and 6) complexity demands different ways of implementing ideas and assessing the system. To enhance our exploration of key insights, we augmented the knowledge gleaned from the series with key articles on complexity in the literature.ConclusionsUltimately, complexity thinking acknowledges the “messiness” that we seek to control in healthcare and encourages us to embrace it. This means seeing challenges as opportunities for adaptation, stimulating innovative solutions to ensure positive adaptation, leveraging the social system to enable ideas to emerge and spread across the system, and even more important, acknowledging that these adaptive actions are part of system behaviour just as much as periods of stability are. By embracing uncertainty and adapting innovatively, complexity thinking enables system actors to engage meaningfully and comfortably in healthcare system transformation.