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 STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Primary Care
Published in: BMC Primary Care 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Using program evaluation to support knowledge translation in an interprofessional primary care team: a case study

Authors: Catherine Donnelly, Lyn Shulha, Don Klinger, Lori Letts

Published in: BMC Primary Care | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Evaluation is a fundamental component in building quality primary care and is ideally situated to support individual, team and organizational learning by offering an accessible form of participatory inquiry. The evaluation literature has begun to recognize the unique features of KT evaluations and has described attributes to consider when evaluating KT activities. While both disciplines have focused on the evaluation of KT activities neither has explored the role of evaluation in KT. The purpose of the paper is to examine how participation in program evaluation can support KT in a primary care setting.

Methods

A mixed methods case study design was used, where evaluation was conceptualized as a change process and intervention. A Memory Clinic at an interprofessional primary care clinic was the setting in which the study was conducted. An evaluation framework, Pathways of Influence provided the theoretical foundation to understand how program evaluation can facilitate the translation of knowledge at the level of the individual, inter-personal (Memory Clinic team) and the organization. Data collection included questionnaires, interviews, evaluation log and document analysis. Questionnaires and interviews were administered both before and after the evaluation: Pattern matching was used to analyze the data based on predetermined propositions.

Results

Individuals gained program knowledge that resulted in changes to both individual and program practices. One of the key themes was the importance clinicians placed on local, program based knowledge. The evaluation had less influence on the broader health organization.

Conclusions

Program evaluation facilitated individual, team and organizational learning. The use of evaluation to support KT is ideally suited to a primary care setting by offering relevant and applicable knowledge to primary care team members while being sensitive to local context.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Menear M, Grindrod K, Clouston K, Norton P, Légaré F. Advancing knowledge translation in primary care. Can Fam Physician. 2012;58:623–7.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Beaulieu M-D, Proulx M, Jobin G, Kugler M, Gossard F, Denis J-L, Larouche D. When Is Knowledge Ripe for Primary Care? An Exploratory Study on the Meaning of Evidence. Eval Health Prof. 2008;31:22–42.CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, Robinson N. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26:13–24.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Davison CM. Knowledge translation: Implications for evaluation. N Dir Eval. 2009;2009:75–87.CrossRef
6.
Bhattacharyya OK, Estey EA, Zwarenstein M. Methodologies to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions: a primer for researchers and health care managers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:32–40.CrossRefPubMed
7.
LaBelle Oliver M. The transfer process: Implications for evaluation. N Dir Eval. 2009;2009:61–73.CrossRef
8.
Weiss, C. H. (1981). Measuring the use of evaluation (p. 17–33). In J.A. Ciarlo (ed.), Utilizing Evaluation: Concepts and Measurement Techniques. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage 13. Alkin M, Taut S: Unbundling Evaluation Use. Stud Educ Eval 2003, 29:1–12.
9.
Brennan S, McKenzie JE, Whitty P, Buchan H, Green S. Continuous quality improvement: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. The Cochrane Library. 2009;(4):CD003319. doi: 10.​1002/​14651858.​CD003319.​pub2.
10.
Yarbrough DB, Shulha LM, Hopson RK, Caruthers FA. The program evaluation standards. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc; 2011.
11.
Cousins JB, Whitmore E. Framing participatory evaluation. N Dir Eval. 1998;1998:5–23.CrossRef
12.
Patton MQ. Utilization-Focused Evaluation. 4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Inc; 2008.
13.
Suárez-Herrera JC, Springett J, Kagan C. Critical Connections between Participatory Evaluation, Organizational Learning and Intentional Change in Pluralistic Organizations. Evaluation. 2009;15:321–42.CrossRef
14.
Preskill H, Torres RT. The learning dimension of evaluation use. N Dir Eval. 2000;2000:25–37.CrossRef
15.
Shulha LM, Cousins JB. Evaluation Use: Theory, Research, and Practice Since 1986. Am J Eval. 1997;18:195–208.CrossRef
16.
Collier R. Verdict still out on family health teams. Can Med Assoc J. 2011;183:1131–2.CrossRef
17.
Jaakkimainen L, Upshur R, Klein-Geltink JE, Leong A, Maaten S, Schultz SE, Wang L. Primary care in Ontario: ICES Atlas. 2006.
18.
Henry GT, Mark MM. Beyond Use: Understanding Evaluation’s Influence on Attitudes and Actions. Am J Eval. 2003;24:293–314.CrossRef
19.
Mark MM, Henry GT. The Mechanisms and Outcomes of Evaluation Influence. Evaluation. 2004;10:35–57.CrossRef
20.
Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong BN, Dziedzic K, Treweek S, Eldridge S, Everitt H, Kennedy A, Qureshi N, Rogers A, Peacock R. Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):1.
21.
Yin RK. Case study research: Design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc; 2009.
22.
Stake R. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc; 1995.
23.
Lee L, Hillier LM, Stolee P, Heckman G, Gagnon M, McAiney CA, Harvey D. Enhancing dementia care: a primary care-based memory clinic. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58:2197–204.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Cousins JB, Whitmore E, Shulha L. Arguments for a Common Set of Principles for Collaborative Inquiry in Evaluation. Am J Eval. 2013;34:7–22.CrossRef
25.
Donnelly C, Letts L, Klinger D, Shulha L. Supporting knowledge translation through evaluation: Evaluator as knowledge broker. Can J Prog Eval. 2014;29:36–61.
26.
Pain K, Hagler P, Warren S. Development of an instrument to evaluate the research orientation of clinical professionals. Can J Rehabil. 1996;9:93–100.
27.
Pain K, Magill-Evans J, Darrah J, Hagler P, Warren S. Effects of profession and facility type on research utilization by rehabilitation professionals. J Allied Health. 2004;33:3–9.PubMed
28.
Bonner A, Sando J. Examining the knowledge, attitude and use of research by nurses. J Nurs Manag. 2008;16:334–43.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Henderson A, Winch S, Holzhauser K, De Vries S. The motivation of health professionals to explore research evidence in their practice: An intervention study. J Clin Nurs. 2006;15:1559–64.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Squires JE, Estabrooks CA, O’Rourke HM, Gustavsson P, Newburn-Cook CV, Wallin L. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of self-report research utilization measures used in healthcare. Implement Sci. 2011;6:83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Schroder C, Medves J, Paterson M, Byrnes V, Chapman C, O’Riordan A, Pichora D, Kelly C. Development and pilot testing of the collaborative practice assessment tool. J Interprof Care. 2011;25:189–95.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Stanfield BR. The art of focused conversation. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers; 2000.
33.
Villeneuve M, Jamieson M, Donnelly C, White C, Lava J. Theory to practice learning: Two approaches. Acad Exch Q. 2009;13:19.
34.
Krefting L. Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. Am J Occup Ther. 1991;45:214–22.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Golafshani N. Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Qual Rep. 2003;8:597–607.
36.
Pappano D, Conners G, McIntosh S, Humiston S, Roma D. Sources of knowledge transfer among primary care pediatric health care providers. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2008;47:930–4.CrossRef
37.
Gabbay J, le May A. Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed “mindlines?” Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1013.
38.
Urban JB, Trochim W. The Role of Evaluation in Research—Practice Integration Working Toward the “‘Golden Spike’”. Am J Eval. 2009;30:538–53.CrossRef
39.
Preskill H, Torres RT. Evaluative inquiry for learning in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc; 1999.
40.
Preskill H, Torres RT. Building Capacity for Organizational Learning Through Evaluative Inquiry. Evaluation. 1999;5:42–60.CrossRef
41.
Torres RT, Preskill H. Evaluation and organizational learning: past, present, and future. Am J Eval. 2001;22:387–95.CrossRef
42.
Christie CA. Reported Influence of Evaluation Data on Decision Makers’ Actions An Empirical Examination. Am J Eval. 2007;28:8–25.CrossRef
43.
Poulton BC, West MA. The determinants of effectiveness in primary health care teams. J Interprof Care. 1999;13:7–18.CrossRef
44.
Shaw A, de Lusignan S, Rowlands G. Do primary care professionals work as a team: a qualitative study. J Interprof Care. 2005;19:396–405.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Waldman JD, Kelly F, Arora S, Smith HL. The shocking cost of turnover in health care. Health Care Manage Rev. 2004;29:2–7.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Woltmann EM, Whitley R, McHugo GJ, Brunette M, Torrey WC, Coots L, Lynde D, Drake RE. The role of staff turnover in the implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health care. Psychiatr Serv. 2008;59:732–7.CrossRefPubMed
47.
García-Iriarte E, Suarez-Balcazar Y, Taylor-Ritzler T, Luna M. A Catalyst-for-Change Approach to Evaluation Capacity Building. Am J Eval. 2011;32:168–82.CrossRef
48.
Flodgren G, Parmelli E, Doumit G, Gattellari M, O’Brien MA, Grimshaw J, Eccles MP: Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2011:CD000125. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD000125.​pub4
49.
Hueftle Stockdill S, Baizerman M, Compton DW. Toward a definition of the ECB process: A conversation with the ECB literature. N Dir Eval. 2002;2002:7–26.CrossRef
50.
Labin SN, Duffy JL, Meyers DC, Wandersman A, Lesesne CA: A Research Synthesis of the Evaluation Capacity Building Literature. Am J Eval. 2012;1098214011434608.
51.
Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82:581–629.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
52.
53.
54.
55.
Metadata
Title
Using program evaluation to support knowledge translation in an interprofessional primary care team: a case study
Authors
Catherine Donnelly
Lyn Shulha
Don Klinger
Lori Letts
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Primary Care / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2731-4553
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0538-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Primary Care 1/2016 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Study protocol of the ESUB-MG cluster randomized trial: a pragmatic trial assessing the implementation of urine drug screening in general practice for buprenorphine maintained patients

Research article

Sex and age differences in the achievement of control targets in patients with type 2 diabetes: results from a population-based study in a South European region

Research article

Burnout among after-hours home visit doctors in Australia

Research article

Prevalence of potential underlying aetiology of macrocytic anaemia in Dutch general practice

Research article

Developing a response to family violence in primary health care: the New Zealand experience

Research article

Statin prescription initiation and lifestyle behaviour: a primary care cohort study