Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2010

Open Access 01-12-2010 | Study protocol

Interprofessional collaborative practice within cancer teams: Translating evidence into action. A mixed methods study protocol

Authors: Dominique Tremblay, Danielle Drouin, Ariella Lang, Danièle Roberge, Judith Ritchie, Anne Plante

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

A regional integrated cancer network has implemented a program (educational workshops, reflective and mentoring activities) designed to support the uptake of evidence-informed interprofessional collaborative practices (referred to in this text as EIPCP) within cancer teams. This research project, which relates to the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (RNAO) Best Practice Guidelines and other sources of research evidence, represents a unique opportunity to learn more about the factors and processes involved in the translation of evidence-based recommendations into professional practices. The planned study seeks to address context-specific challenges and the concerns of nurses and other stakeholders regarding the uptake of evidence-based recommendations to effectively promote and support interprofessional collaborative practices.

Aim

This study aims to examine the uptake of evidence-based recommendations from best practice guidelines intended to enhance interprofessional collaborative practices within cancer teams.

Design

The planned study constitutes a practical trial, defined as a trial designed to provide comprehensive information that is grounded in real-world healthcare dynamics. An exploratory mixed methods study design will be used. It will involve collecting quantitative data to assess professionals' knowledge and attitudes, as well as practice environment factors associated with effective uptake of evidence-based recommendations. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted concurrently with care providers to gather qualitative data for describing the processes involved in the translation of evidence into action from both the users' (n = 12) and providers' (n = 24) perspectives. The Graham et al. Ottawa Model of Research Use will serve to construct operational definitions of concepts, and to establish the initial coding labels to be used in the thematic analysis of the qualitative data. Quantitative and qualitative results will be merged during interpretation to provide complementary perspectives of interrelated contextual factors that enhance the uptake of EIPCP and changes in professional practices.

Discussion

The information obtained from the study will produce new knowledge on the interventions and sources of support most conducive to the uptake of evidence and building of capacity to sustain new interprofessional collaborative practice patterns. It will provide new information on strategies for overcoming barriers to evidence-informed interventions. The findings will also pinpoint critical determinants of 'what works and why' taking into account the interplay between evidence, operational, relational micro-processes of care, uniqueness of patients' needs and preferences, and the local context.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control: Why the need for a shift in focus in our cancer care system?. Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control Bulletin. 2005, 1: 1-4.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council: Interprofessional Collaboration. A summary of key reference documents & selected highlights from the literature. 2008, Toronto: Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council
9.
Zwarenstein M, Goldman J, Reeves S: Interprofessional collaboration: effects of practice-based interventions on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Db of Syst Rev. 2009
10.
Association of Ontario Health Centers [AOHC]: Building better teams: A toolkit for strengthening teamwork in community health centres. 2007, Canadian Alliance of Community Health Centre Associations
11.
D'Amour D, Beaulieu MD, San Martin Rodriguez L, Ferrada-Videla M: Key elements of collaborative practice & frameworks: conceptual basis for interdisciplinary practice. Interdisciplinary education for collaborative patient-centred practice Research and findings report. 2004, Ottawa: Health Canada, 64-98.
12.
San Martin Rodriguez L: Évaluation des effets de la collaboration interprofessionnelle chez les professionnels et chez les patients dans les unités d'hospitalisation en oncologie et en hématologie. Thèse de doctorat. 2007, Université de Montréal, Faculty of Nursing
13.
Lemak CH, Johnson C, Goodrick EE: Collaboration to improve services for the uninsured: exploring the concept of health navigators as interorganizational integrators. Health Care Manage Rev. 2004, 29: 196-206.CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Thornhill J, Dault M, Clements D: CHSRF knowledge transfer: ready, set ... collaborate? The evidence says 'Go'; so what's slowing adoption of inter-professional collaboration in primary healthcare?. Healthcare Quarterly. 2008, 11: 14-16.
16.
17.
Peterson W, Medves J, Davies B, Graham I: Multidisciplinary collaborative maternity care in Canada: easier said than done. JOGC. 2007, 29: 880-886.PubMed
18.
Norris SL, Nichols PJ, Caspersen CJ, Glasgow RE, Engelgau MM, Jack L, Isham G, Snyder SR, Carande-Kulis VG, Garfield S: The effectiveness of disease and case management for people with diabetes. A systematic review. Am J of Prev Med. 2002, 22: 15-38. 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00423-3.CrossRef
19.
Graham I, Logan J: Innovations in knowledge transfer and continuity of care. CJNR. 2004, 36: 89-103.PubMed
20.
Logan J, Harrison MB, Graham ID, Dunn KB, J: Evidence-based pressure-ulcer practice: The Ottawa Model of Research Use. CJNR. 1999, 31: 37-52.PubMed
21.
Protheroe J, Bower P, Chew-Graham C: The use of mixed methodology in evaluating complex interventions: identifying patient factors that moderate the effects of a decision aid. Fam Pract. 2007, 24: 594-600. 10.1093/fampra/cmm066.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Logan J, Graham I: Toward a comprehensive interdisciplinary model of health care research use. Sci Commun. 1998, 20: 27-246. 10.1177/1075547098020002004.CrossRef
23.
Denis J-L, Hébert Y, Langley A, Lozeau D, Trottier LH: Explaining diffusion patterns for complex health care innovations. Health Care Manage Rev. 2002, 27: 60-73.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Fitzgerald L, Ferlie E, Wood M, Hawkins C: Interlocking interactions, the diffusion of innovations in health care. Hum Relat. 2002, 55: 1429-1449. 10.1177/001872602128782213.CrossRef
25.
Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Bate P, Mcfarlane F, Kiriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in health service organisations. 2005, Massachusetts: Blackwell PublishingCrossRef
26.
Fleuren M, Wieffernink K, Paulussen T: Determinants of innovation within health care organizations. Literature review and Delphi study. Int J Qual Health C. 2004, 16: 107-123. 10.1093/intqhc/mzh030.CrossRef
27.
Länsisalmi H, Kivimäki M, Aalto P, Ruoranen R: Innovation in healthcare: a systematic review of recent research. Nur Sc Quart. 2006, 19: 66-72. 10.1177/0894318405284129. discussion 65CrossRef
28.
Reay T, Golden-Biddle K, Germann K: Legitimizing a new role: Small wins and microprocesses of change. Acad of Manage J. 2006, 19: 977-998. 10.2307/20159812.CrossRef
29.
Potvin L, Golberg C: Deux rôles joués par l'évaluation dans la transformation de la pratique en promotion de la santé. Promotion de la santé au Canada et au Québec, perspectives critiques. Edited by: O'Neil M, Dupéré S, Pederson A, Rootman I. 2006, Québec: Presses de l'Université Laval, 457-473.
30.
31.
Oxman AD, Lombard C, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, Maclure M, Zwarenstein M: Why we will remain pragmatists: four problems with the impractical mechanistic framework and a better solution. J Clinical Epidemio. 2009, 62: 485-488. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.08.015.CrossRef
32.
Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL: Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2007, London: Sage
33.
Morse JM: Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nur Res. 1991, 40: 120-123.
34.
Patton MQ: Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 2001, Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 3
35.
36.
Heinemann GD, Schmitt MH, Farrell MP, Brallier SA: Development of an Attitudes toward Health Care Teams Scale. Eval Health Prof. 1999, 22: 123-142. 10.1177/01632789922034202.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Sicotte C, D'Amour D, Moreault M: Interdisciplinary collaboration within Quebec cummunity health care centers. Soc Sci and Med. 2002, 55: 991-1003. 10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00232-5.CrossRef
38.
39.
40.
Tremblay D: La traduction d'une innovation organisationnelle dans les pratiques professionnelles de réseau: L'infirmière pivot en oncologie. 2008, Université de Montréal, Faculty of Nursing
41.
Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for the behavior sciences. 1988, Hillsdalem, NJ: Erlbaum, 2
42.
Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L: How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods. 2006, 18: 59-82. 10.1177/1525822X05279903.CrossRef
43.
Conway JM, Huffcutt AI: A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organl Res Methods. 2003, 6: 147-168. 10.1177/1094428103251541.CrossRef
44.
Field A: Discovering statistics using SPSS. 2005, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2
45.
Richards L: Using NVivo in qualitative research. 1999, London: Sage
46.
Miles MB, Huberman AM: Analyse des données qualitatives. 2003, Paris: De Boeck
47.
Saldana J: The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 2009, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
48.
McGrath JE, Tschan F: Dynamics in groups and teams. Handbook of organizational change and innovation. Edited by: Poole MS, Van de Ven AH. 2004, New York: Oxford University Press, 50-72.
49.
Contandriopoulos A-P, Champagne F, Potvin L, Denis J-L, Boyle P: Savoir préparer une recherche, la définir, la structurée, la financer. 1990, Montreal: Les presses de l'Université de Montreal
50.
Hanson WE, Creswell JW, Plano VL, Petska KS, Creswell JD: Mixed Methods Research Designs in Counseling Psychology. J of Couns Psychol. 2005, 52: 224-235. 10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.224.CrossRef
51.
Guba AEG, Lincoln YS: Forth generation evaluation. 1989, Newbury Park: Sage Publications
52.
Glasgow RE, Emmons KM: How can we increase translation of research into practice? Types of evidence needed. Annu Rev of Publ Health. 2007, 28: 413-433. 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144145.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Interprofessional collaborative practice within cancer teams: Translating evidence into action. A mixed methods study protocol
Authors
Dominique Tremblay
Danielle Drouin
Ariella Lang
Danièle Roberge
Judith Ritchie
Anne Plante
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2010
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-53

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

Implementation Science 1/2010 Go to the issue

Systematic Review

A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework

Study protocol

A randomized trial to evaluate e-learning interventions designed to improve learner's performance, satisfaction, and self-efficacy with the AGREE II

Study protocol

Making sense of health information technology implementation: A qualitative study protocol

Research article

Collaborative research between clinicians and researchers: a multiple case study of implementation

Methodology

Improving benchmarking by using an explicit framework for the development of composite indicators: an example using pediatric quality of care

Study protocol

The preventing recurrent vascular events and neurological worsening through intensive organized case-management (PREVENTION) trial protocol [clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00931788]