Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 8: developing, implementing and evaluating an evidence dissemination service in a local healthcare setting

Authors: Claire Harris, Marie Garrubba, Angela Melder, Catherine Voutier, Cara Waller, Richard King, Wayne Ramsey

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This is the eighth in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. The SHARE Program was a systematic, integrated, evidence-based program for disinvestment within a large Australian health service. One of the aims was to explore methods to deliver existing high quality synthesised evidence directly to decision-makers to drive decision-making proactively. An Evidence Dissemination Service (EDS) was proposed. While this was conceived as a method to identify disinvestment opportunities, it became clear that it could also be a way to review all practices for consistency with current evidence. This paper reports the development, implementation and evaluation of two models of an in-house EDS.

Methods

Frameworks for development of complex interventions, implementation of evidence-based change, and evaluation and explication of processes and outcomes were adapted and/or applied. Mixed methods including a literature review, surveys, interviews, workshops, audits, document analysis and action research were used to capture barriers, enablers and local needs; identify effective strategies; develop and refine proposals; ascertain feedback and measure outcomes.

Results

Methods to identify, capture, classify, store, repackage, disseminate and facilitate use of synthesised research evidence were investigated. In Model 1, emails containing links to multiple publications were sent to all self-selected participants who were asked to determine whether they were the relevant decision-maker for any of the topics presented, whether change was required, and to take the relevant action. This voluntary framework did not achieve the aim of ensuring practice was consistent with current evidence. In Model 2, the need for change was established prior to dissemination, then a summary of the evidence was sent to the decision-maker responsible for practice in the relevant area who was required to take appropriate action and report the outcome. This mandatory governance framework was successful. The factors influencing decisions, processes and outcomes were identified.

Conclusion

An in-house EDS holds promise as a method of identifying disinvestment opportunities and/or reviewing local practice for consistency with current evidence. The resource-intensive nature of delivery of the EDS is a potential barrier. The findings from this study will inform further exploration.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Green S, King R, Ramsey W, et al. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in the local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2208-1. Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Green S, King R, Ramsey W, et al. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in the local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2208-1.
3.
go back to reference Harris C, Allen K, King R, Ramsey W, Kelly C, Thiagarajan M. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 2: identifying opportunities for disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2211-6. Harris C, Allen K, King R, Ramsey W, Kelly C, Thiagarajan M. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 2: identifying opportunities for disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2211-6.
4.
go back to reference Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Brooke V. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 3: examining how resource allocation decisions are made, implemented and evaluated in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2207-2. Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Brooke V. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 3: examining how resource allocation decisions are made, implemented and evaluated in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2207-2.
5.
go back to reference Harris C, Ko H, Waller C, Sloss P, Williams P. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 4: exploring opportunities and methods for consumer engagement in resource allocation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2212-5. Harris C, Ko H, Waller C, Sloss P, Williams P. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 4: exploring opportunities and methods for consumer engagement in resource allocation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2212-5.
6.
go back to reference Harris C, Allen K, Brooke V, Dyer T, Waller C, King R, et al. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 6: investigating methods to identify, prioritise, implement and evaluate disinvestment projects in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2269-1. Harris C, Allen K, Brooke V, Dyer T, Waller C, King R, et al. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 6: investigating methods to identify, prioritise, implement and evaluate disinvestment projects in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2269-1.
7.
go back to reference Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Dyer T, Brooke V, Garrubba M, et al. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 7: supporting staff in evidence-based decision-making, implementation and evaluation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2388-8. Harris C, Allen K, Waller C, Dyer T, Brooke V, Garrubba M, et al. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 7: supporting staff in evidence-based decision-making, implementation and evaluation in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2388-8.
10.
20.
go back to reference Gerdvilaite J, Nachtnebel A. Disinvestment: overview of disinvestment experiences and challenges in selected countries. HTA- Projektbericht., vol Nr. 57. Vienna: Ludwig Boltzmann Institut für. Health Technol Assess. 2011; Gerdvilaite J, Nachtnebel A. Disinvestment: overview of disinvestment experiences and challenges in selected countries. HTA- Projektbericht., vol Nr. 57. Vienna: Ludwig Boltzmann Institut für. Health Technol Assess. 2011;
23.
go back to reference Williams I, McIver S, Moore D, Bryan S. The use of economic evaluations in NHS decision making: a review and empirical investigation. Health Technol Assess. 2008;12(7) Williams I, McIver S, Moore D, Bryan S. The use of economic evaluations in NHS decision making: a review and empirical investigation. Health Technol Assess. 2008;12(7)
24.
go back to reference Harris C, Green S, Ramsey W, Allen K, King R. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 1: introducing a series of papers reporting an investigation of disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2210-7. Harris C, Green S, Ramsey W, Allen K, King R. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 1: introducing a series of papers reporting an investigation of disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12913-017-2210-7.
27.
go back to reference Dobbins M, Ciliska D, Cockerill R, Barnsley J, DiCenso A. A framework for the dissemination and utilization of research for health-care policy and practice. Online J Knowl Synth Nurs. 2002;9:7.PubMed Dobbins M, Ciliska D, Cockerill R, Barnsley J, DiCenso A. A framework for the dissemination and utilization of research for health-care policy and practice. Online J Knowl Synth Nurs. 2002;9:7.PubMed
28.
37.
go back to reference Harris C, Allen K, King R, Ramsey W, Green S. Sustainability in Health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 11: reporting outcomes of an evidence-driven approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; in press Harris C, Allen K, King R, Ramsey W, Green S. Sustainability in Health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 11: reporting outcomes of an evidence-driven approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; in press
38.
go back to reference Campbell NC, Murry E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ. 2007;334:455–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Campbell NC, Murry E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ. 2007;334:455–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
go back to reference Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet. 2003;362(9391):1225–30.CrossRefPubMed Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet. 2003;362(9391):1225–30.CrossRefPubMed
42.
go back to reference Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust. 2004;180(6 Suppl):S57–60.PubMed Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust. 2004;180(6 Suppl):S57–60.PubMed
43.
go back to reference NSW Health. A framework for building capacity to improve health. Better Health Centre, NSW Health Department, Sydney. 2001. NSW Health. A framework for building capacity to improve health. Better Health Centre, NSW Health Department, Sydney. 2001.
50.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, McLeod CB, Abelson J. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? The Milbank quarterly. 2003;81(2):221–48. 171-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, McLeod CB, Abelson J. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? The Milbank quarterly. 2003;81(2):221–48. 171-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
go back to reference Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall TK, editors. Models and frameworks for implementing evidence-based practice: linking evidence to action. Evidence-based nursing. Chichester: UK Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall TK, editors. Models and frameworks for implementing evidence-based practice: linking evidence to action. Evidence-based nursing. Chichester: UK Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
57.
go back to reference Knowlton LW, Phillips CC. The Logic Model Guidebook. Better Strategies for Great Results. . Second ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2013. Knowlton LW, Phillips CC. The Logic Model Guidebook. Better Strategies for Great Results. . Second ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2013.
58.
go back to reference W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Logic Model Development Guide. Using Logic Models to Bring Together Planning, Evaluation, and Action. 2004. W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Logic Model Development Guide. Using Logic Models to Bring Together Planning, Evaluation, and Action. 2004.
63.
go back to reference Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J. Factors affecting the utilization of systematic reviews. A study of public health decision makers. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17(2):203–14.CrossRefPubMed Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J. Factors affecting the utilization of systematic reviews. A study of public health decision makers. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17(2):203–14.CrossRefPubMed
68.
go back to reference Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, Harvey E, Oxman AD, Thomson MA. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane effective practice and Organization of Care Review Group. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):465–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, Harvey E, Oxman AD, Thomson MA. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane effective practice and Organization of Care Review Group. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):465–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
70.
go back to reference Healy J, Braithwaite J. Designing safer health care through responsive regulation. Med J Aust. 2006;184(10 Suppl):S56–9.PubMed Healy J, Braithwaite J. Designing safer health care through responsive regulation. Med J Aust. 2006;184(10 Suppl):S56–9.PubMed
72.
go back to reference Rogers E. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003. Rogers E. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.
82.
go back to reference White C, Sanders Schmidler G, Borsky A, Butler M, Wang Z, Robinson K et al. Understanding Health-Systems’ Use of and Need for Evidence To Inform Decisionmaking. Research White Paper. AHRQ Publication No 17(18)-EHC035-EF (Prepared by the University of Connecticut and Duke Evidence-based Practice Centers under Contract No. 290–2015-00012-I and 290–2015-00004-I.) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2017. Available from: www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm. Accessed: 24 Oct 2017. White C, Sanders Schmidler G, Borsky A, Butler M, Wang Z, Robinson K et al. Understanding Health-Systems’ Use of and Need for Evidence To Inform Decisionmaking. Research White Paper. AHRQ Publication No 17(18)-EHC035-EF (Prepared by the University of Connecticut and Duke Evidence-based Practice Centers under Contract No. 290–2015-00012-I and 290–2015-00004-I.) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2017. Available from: www.​effectivehealthc​are.​ahrq.​gov/​reports/​final.​cfm. Accessed: 24 Oct 2017.
83.
go back to reference Bowen S, Erickson T, Martens PJ, Crockett S. More than "using research": the real challenges in promoting evidence-informed decision-making. Healthcare Policy. 2009;4(3):87–102.PubMedPubMedCentral Bowen S, Erickson T, Martens PJ, Crockett S. More than "using research": the real challenges in promoting evidence-informed decision-making. Healthcare Policy. 2009;4(3):87–102.PubMedPubMedCentral
84.
go back to reference Karkos B, Peters K. A magnet Community hospital: fewer barriers to nursing research utilization. The Journal of nursing administration. 2006;36(7–8):377–82.CrossRefPubMed Karkos B, Peters K. A magnet Community hospital: fewer barriers to nursing research utilization. The Journal of nursing administration. 2006;36(7–8):377–82.CrossRefPubMed
88.
go back to reference Robinson S, Dickinson H, Williams I, Freeman T, Rumbold B, Spence K. Setting priorities in health: a study of English primary care trusts: health services management Centre: University of Birmingham and the Nuffield Trust; 2011. Robinson S, Dickinson H, Williams I, Freeman T, Rumbold B, Spence K. Setting priorities in health: a study of English primary care trusts: health services management Centre: University of Birmingham and the Nuffield Trust; 2011.
90.
go back to reference Peacock SJ, Mitton C, Ruta D, Donaldson C, Bate A, Hedden L. Priority setting in healthcare: towards guidelines for the program budgeting and marginal analysis framework. Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research. 2010;10(5):539–52. https://doi.org/10.1586/erp.10.66.CrossRef Peacock SJ, Mitton C, Ruta D, Donaldson C, Bate A, Hedden L. Priority setting in healthcare: towards guidelines for the program budgeting and marginal analysis framework. Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research. 2010;10(5):539–52. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1586/​erp.​10.​66.CrossRef
91.
go back to reference Joshi NP, Stahnisch FW, Noseworthy TW. Reassessment of Health Technologies: Obsolescence and Waste. 2009. Joshi NP, Stahnisch FW, Noseworthy TW. Reassessment of Health Technologies: Obsolescence and Waste. 2009.
94.
go back to reference National Health and Medical Research Council. Ethical Considerations in Quality Assurance and Evaluation Activities. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2014. National Health and Medical Research Council. Ethical Considerations in Quality Assurance and Evaluation Activities. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2014.
Metadata
Title
Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 8: developing, implementing and evaluating an evidence dissemination service in a local healthcare setting
Authors
Claire Harris
Marie Garrubba
Angela Melder
Catherine Voutier
Cara Waller
Richard King
Wayne Ramsey
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2932-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Health Services Research 1/2018 Go to the issue