Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation

Abstract

BackgroundHealth research is conducted with the expectation that it advances knowledge and eventually translates into improved health systems and population health. However, research findings are often caught in the know-do gap: they are not acted upon in a timely way or not applied at all. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is advanced as a way to increase the relevance, applicability and impact of research. With IKT, knowledge users work with researchers throughout the research process, starting with identification of the research question. Knowledge users represent those who would be able to use research results to inform their decisions (e.g. clinicians, managers, policy makers, patients/families and others). Stakeholders are increasingly interested in the idea that IKT generates greater and faster societal impact. Stakeholders are all those who are interested in the use of research results but may not necessarily use them for their own decision-making (e.g. governments, funders, researchers, health system managers and policy makers, patients and clinicians). Although IKT is broadly accepted, the actual research supporting it is limited and there is uncertainty about how best to conduct and support IKT. This paper presents a protocol for a programme of research testing the assumption that engaging the users of research in phases of its production leads to (a) greater appreciation of and capacity to use research; (b) the production of more relevant, useful and applicable research that results in greater impact; and (c) conditions under which it is more likely that research results will influence policy, managerial and clinical decision-making.MethodsThe research programme will adopt an interdisciplinary, international, cross-sector approach, using multiple and mixed methods to reflect the complex and social nature of research partnerships. We will use ongoing and future natural IKT experiments as multiple cases to study IKT in depth, and we will take advantage of the team’s existing relationships with provincial, national and international organizations. Case studies will be retrospective and prospective, and the 7-year grant period will enable longitudinal studies. The initiation of partnerships, funding processes, the research lifecycle and then outcomes/impacts post project will be studied in real time. These living laboratories will also allow testing of strategies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the IKT approach.DiscussionThis is the first interdisciplinary, systematic and programmatic research study on IKT. The research will provide scientific evidence on how to reliably and validly measure collaborative research partnerships and their impacts. The proposed research will build the science base for IKT, assess its relationship with research use and identify best practices and appropriate conditions for conducting IKT to achieve the greatest impact. It will also train and mentor the next generation of IKT researchers.

Preventing surgical site infections: Facilitators and barriers to nurses’ adherence to clinical practice guidelines—A qualitative study

“…Many participants stated that the terminology used in the paper‐based version wound documentation form was difficult to understand and lacked important information such as patient education and wound pain assessment. Therefore, future interventions aimed at standardising wound documentation should be developed and implemented with end‐users’ (nurses) input, a highly recommended strategy in change management and behaviour change literature (Graham, Kothari, & McCutcheon, ; Kotter, ). Clinician engagement in the design and implementation process increases their ownership of the process, making it more likely that practice change will occur.…”

“…Understandably, clear and complete wound care documentation helps healthcare professionals to communicate and track patients' wound healing process. Literature suggests that only 40%-75% of wound care episodes were documented (Gillespie, Chaboyer, Kang et al, 2014), with some of these being incomplete and some important information missing (Ding et al, 2017;Gillespie, Chaboyer, Kang et al, 2014;Wong, 2009 (Graham, Kothari, & McCutcheon, 2018;Kotter, 1996). Clinician engagement in the design and implementation process increases their ownership of the process, making it more likely that practice change will occur.…”

Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review

“…The expectation that new knowledge will translate into everyday practice is commonly misjudged, as care based on tradition or clinical experience, rather than best available evidence, continues to inform the practice of some healthcare providers (Graham et al, 2018;Nagpal, Sachdeva, Sengupta, Bhargava, & Bhartia, 2015). In Australia, mandatory regulations for midwives explicitly state that clinical practice must be informed by high-quality evidence (NMBA, 2018).…”

“…The gap represents not only the delayed transfer of evidence into clinical contexts, but also the gap between knowledge producers and knowledge users (Rycroft‐Malone et al, ). A number of remedial approaches have been proposed to address this phenomenon in recent years, which are largely conceived from the fields of psychology and Implementation Science (IS) (Gagliardi, Berta, Kothari, Boyko, & Urquhart, ; Graham, Kothari, & McCutcheon, ; Tucker, ). However, there remains limited research on the use of evidence‐based information by midwives in maternity contexts.…”

Community and programmatic factors influencing effective use of system dynamic models

“…The lack of application of research findings to real‐life settings is a well‐known problem (Brownson et al, ), referred to as the knowing–doing gap (Pfeffer and Sutton, ; Graham et al, ). Even when adoption of new ideas, processes, or tools offers clear advantages, there is still often a significant delay before adoption.…”