Implementation Science: Application of Evidence‐Based Practice Models to Improve Healthcare Quality

Proposed changes to the Common Rule are proffered to save almost 7,000 reviews annually and consequently vast amounts of investigator and IRB-member time. However, the proposed changes have been subject to criticism. While some have lauded the changes as being imperfect, but nevertheless as improvements, others have contended that ‘neither the scientific community nor the public can be confident that improved practices will emerge from the regulatory changes mandated by the NPRM.’ In the present article, I discuss an important aspect that has been overlooked: the question of whether benefits will emerge is demonstrably empirical, yet data upon which to draw conclusions are conspicuous by their absence. This is thrown into sharp relief when we consider the current environment in which health research is increasingly focused on providing evidence of need or benefit, where there is greater emphasis on evidence-based practice, and when we have the nascent field of implementation science.

Download Full-text

Putting Research Into Practice: Tutorials on Clinical Research, Implementation Science, and Evidence-Based Practice

Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups ◽

10.1044/2019_persp.st.exam ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 1-5

Keyword(s):

Clinical Research ◽

Implementation Science ◽

Evidence Based Practice ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Research Implementation

Download Full-text

Leadership in evidence-based practice: a systematic review

Leadership in Health Services ◽

10.1108/lhs-08-2014-0061 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 28 (4) ◽

pp. 298-316 ◽

Cited By ~ 29

Author(s):

Ursula Reichenpfader ◽

Siw Carlfjord ◽

Per Nilsen

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Implementation Science ◽

Empirical Research ◽

Evidence Based Practice ◽

Full Range ◽

Bibliographic Databases ◽

Limited Attention ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Conceptual Base ◽

Content Type

Purpose – This study aims to systematically review published empirical research on leadership as a determinant for the implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) and to investigate leadership conceptualization and operationalization in this field. Design/methodology/approach – A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted. Relevant electronic bibliographic databases and reference lists of pertinent review articles were searched. To be included, a study had to involve empirical research and refer to both leadership and EBP in health care. Study quality was assessed with a structured instrument based on study design. Findings – A total of 17 studies were included. Leadership was mostly viewed as a modifier for implementation success, acting through leadership support. Yet, there was definitional imprecision as well as conceptual inconsistency, and studies seemed to inadequately address situational and contextual factors. Although referring to an organizational factor, the concept was mostly analysed at the individual or group level. Research limitations/implications – The concept of leadership in implementation science seems to be not fully developed. It is unclear whether attempts to tap the concept of leadership in available instruments truly capture and measure the full range of the diverse leadership elements at various levels. Research in implementation science would benefit from a better integration of research findings from other disciplinary fields. Once a more mature concept has been established, researchers in implementation science could proceed to further elaborate operationalization and measurement. Originality/value – Although the relevance of leadership in implementation science has been acknowledged, the conceptual base of leadership in this field has received only limited attention.

Download Full-text