scholarly journals 694 Implementation science: evidence-based car seat education for parents

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. A249.1-A249
Author(s):  
Mikiko Oono ◽  
Koji Kiamura ◽  
Yoshifumi Nishida ◽  
Tatsuhiro Yamanaka
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srijesa Khasnabish ◽  
Zoe Burns ◽  
Madeline Couch ◽  
Mary Mullin ◽  
Randall Newmark ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Data visualization experts have identified core principles to follow when creating visual displays of data that facilitate comprehension. Such principles can be applied to creating effective reports for clinicians that display compliance with quality improvement protocols. A basic tenet of implementation science is continuous monitoring and feedback. Applying best practices for data visualization to reports for clinicians can catalyze implementation and sustainment of new protocols. OBJECTIVE To apply best practices for data visualization to create reports that clinicians find clear and useful. METHODS First, we conducted a systematic literature review to identify best practices for data visualization. We applied these findings and feedback collected via a questionnaire to improve the Fall TIPS Monthly Report (FTMR), which shows compliance with an evidence-based fall prevention program, Fall TIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety). This questionnaire was based on the requirements for effective data display suggested by expert Stephen Few. We then evaluated usability of the FTMR using a 15-item Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES). Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). RESULTS The results of the systematic literature review emphasized that the ideal data display maximizes the information communicated while minimizing the cognitive efforts involved with data interpretation. Factors to consider include selecting the correct type of display (e.g. line vs bar graph) and creating simplistic reports. The qualitative and quantitative evaluations of the original and final FTMR revealed improved perceptions of the visual display of the reports and their usability. Themes that emerged from the staff interviews emphasized the value of simplified reports, meaningful data, and usefulness to clinicians. The mean (SD) rating on the Health-ITUES scale when evaluating the original FTMR was 3.86 (0.19) and increased to 4.29 (0.11) when evaluating the revised FTMR (Mann Whitney U Test, z=-12.25, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Best practices identified through a systematic review can be applied to create effective reports for clinician use. The lessons learned from evaluating FTMR perceptions and measuring usability can be applied to creating effective reports for clinician use in the context of other implementation science projects.


Author(s):  
JoAnn E. Kirchner ◽  
Thomas J. Waltz ◽  
Byron J. Powell ◽  
Jeffrey L. Smith ◽  
Enola K. Proctor

As the field of implementation science moves beyond studying barriers to and facilitators of implementation to the comparative effectiveness of different strategies, it is essential that we create a common taxonomy to define the strategies that we study. Similarly, we must clearly document the implementation strategies that are applied, the factors that influence their selection, and any adaptation of the strategy during the course of implementation and sustainment of the innovation being implemented. By incorporating this type of rigor into our work we will be able to not only advance the science of implementation but also our ability to place evidence-based innovations into the hands of practitioners in a timely and efficient manner.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-84
Author(s):  
Sharon Tucker ◽  
Molly McNett ◽  
Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk ◽  
Kirsten Hanrahan ◽  
Sarah C. Hunter ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (S1) ◽  
pp. S14-S17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjay Saint ◽  
Joel D. Howell ◽  
Sarah L. Krein

Implementing evidence-based infection prevention practices is challenging. Implementation science, which is the study of methods promoting the uptake of evidence into practice, addresses the gap between theory and practice. Just as healthcare epidemiology has emerged as a paradigm for patient safety, infection prevention may serve as a clinical model for implementation researchers.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 263348952110494
Author(s):  
Rachel C. Shelton ◽  
Prajakta Adsul ◽  
April Oh ◽  
Nathalie Moise ◽  
Derek M. Griffith

Background Despite the promise of implementation science (IS) to reduce health inequities, critical gaps and opportunities remain in the field to promote health equity. Prioritizing racial equity and antiracism approaches is critical in these efforts, so that IS does not inadvertently exacerbate disparities based on the selection of frameworks, methods, interventions, and strategies that do not reflect consideration of structural racism and its impacts. Methods Grounded in extant research on structural racism and antiracism, we discuss the importance of advancing understanding of how structural racism as a system shapes racial health inequities and inequitable implementation of evidence-based interventions among racially and ethnically diverse communities. We outline recommendations for explicitly applying an antiracism lens to address structural racism and its manifests through IS. An anti-racism lens provides a framework to guide efforts to confront, address, and eradicate racism and racial privilege by helping people identify racism as a root cause of health inequities and critically examine how it is embedded in policies, structures, and systems that differentially affect racially and ethnically diverse populations. Results We provide guidance for the application of an antiracism lens in the field of IS, focusing on select core elements in implementation research, including: (1) stakeholder engagement; (2) conceptual frameworks and models; (3) development, selection, adaptation of EBIs; (4) evaluation approaches; and (5) implementation strategies. We highlight the need for foundational grounding in antiracism frameworks among implementation scientists to facilitate ongoing self-reflection, accountability, and attention to racial equity, and provide questions to guide such reflection and consideration. Conclusion We conclude with a reflection on how this is a critical time for IS to prioritize focus on justice, racial equity, and real-world equitable impact. Moving IS towards making consideration of health equity and an antiracism lens foundational is central to strengthening the field and enhancing its impact. Plain language abstract There are important gaps and opportunities that exist in promoting health equity through implementation science. Historically, the commonly used frameworks, measures, interventions, strategies, and approaches in the field have not been explicitly focused on equity, nor do they consider the role of structural racism in shaping health and inequitable delivery of evidence-based practices/programs. This work seeks to build off of the long history of research on structural racism and health, and seeks to provide guidance on how to apply an antiracism lens to select core elements of implementation research. We highlight important opportunities for the field to reflect and consider applying an antiracism approach in: 1) stakeholder/community engagement; 2) use of conceptual frameworks; 3) development, selection and adaptation of evidence-based interventions; 4) evaluation approaches; 5) implementation strategies (e.g., how to deliver evidence-based practices, programs, policies); and 6) how researchers conduct their research, with a focus on racial equity. This is an important time for the field of implementation science to prioritize a foundational focus on justice, equity, and real-world impact through the application of an anti-racism lens in their work.


2013 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel L. Odom ◽  
Ann W. Cox ◽  
Matthew E. Brock

The increased prevalence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) has intensified the need for high-quality special education services designed for children and youth with ASD and their families. Implementation science provides guidance for moving innovation, such as utilizing evidence-based practices for students with ASD, into regular practice in schools. The National Professional Development Center on ASD (NPDC) incorporated the principles of implementation science, the scientific knowledge about evidence-based practices, and the measurement of program quality into an intervention approach for students with ASD. This article presents the NPDC model as an example of using implementation science to build systems of professional development that increase the quality of services and promote teachers’ use of evidence-based practices.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. e0220060
Author(s):  
Joseph Cox ◽  
Cassidy Gutner ◽  
Nadine Kronfli ◽  
Anna Lawson ◽  
Michele Robbins ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (9) ◽  
pp. 1068-1073 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Price ◽  
Rinad S Beidas ◽  
Courtney Benjamin Wolk ◽  
Kimberly Genuario ◽  
Anne E Kazak

Abstract Objective Evidence-based screening, assessment, and intervention practices for youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are underutilized. Implementation science (IS) offers theoretical models and frameworks to guide rigorous mixed methods research to advance comprehensive care for children and families. Methods We conducted a targeted review of applications of IS to T1D. Results Pediatric T1D research offers initial, but still limited studies on implementation of evidence-based psychosocial care. IS designates approaches to understanding multi-level factors that influence implementation, ways to alter these factors, and methods to evaluate strategies to improve implementation. Conclusions IS is promising for advancing the translation of pediatric psychology approaches into clinical care. Following the science of implementation, further documentation of the reach of evidence-based care and establishing practice guidelines are important initial steps. Examining the barriers and facilitators of evidence-based psychosocial care can guide the development of testable implementation strategies to improve integration of care. Successful strategies can be evaluated through multi-site controlled implementation trials to explore their effectiveness. These lines of inquiry can be considered within pediatric populations, but may also be used to examine similarities and differences in effectiveness of implementation strategies across populations and settings. Such research has the potential to improve the health and well-being of children and families.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document