Impact of clinical and health services research projects on decision-making: a qualitative study

Health Research Policy and Systems

Joan Escarrabill²  Joan MV Pons¹  Gaietà Permanyer-Miralda¹  Imma Guillamón¹  Paula Adam¹  Maite Solans-Domènech¹ 

[1] CIBER Epidemiologia y Salud Pública, Roc Boronat 81-95, Barcelona, 08020, Spain;Network on Health Services Research in Chronic Diseases (Red de Investigación en Servicios de Salud en Enfermedades Crónicas) (REDISSEC), Villaroel 170, Barcelona, 08036, Spain

关键词: Payback model;    Respiratory diseases;    Research impact;    Qualitative research;    Informed decision-making;   

Others  :  809806
DOI  :  10.1186/1478-4505-11-15

 received in 2012-09-18, accepted in 2013-04-26,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

This article reports on the impact assessment experience of a funding program of non-commercial clinical and health services research. The aim was to assess the level of implementation of results from a subgroup of research projects (on respiratory diseases), and to detect barriers (or facilitators) in the translation of new knowledge to informed decision-making.

Methods

A qualitative study was performed. The sample consisted of six projects on respiratory diseases funded by the Agency for Health Quality and Assessment of Catalonia between 1996 and 2004. Semi-structured interviews to key informants including researchers and healthcare decision-makers were carried out. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed on an individual (key informant) and group (project) basis. In addition, the differences between achieved and expected impacts were described.

Results

Twenty-three semi-structured interviews were conducted. Most participants indicated changes in health services or clinical practice had resulted from research. The channels used to transfer new knowledge were mainly conventional ones, but also in less explicit ways, such as with the involvement of local scientific societies, or via debates and discussions with colleagues and local leaders. The barriers and facilitators identified were mostly organizational (in research management, and clinical and healthcare practice), although there were also some related to the nature of the research as well as personal factors. Both the expected and achieved impacts enabled the identification of the gaps between what is expected and what is truly achieved.

Conclusions

In this study and according to key informants, the impact of these research projects on decision-making can be direct (the application of a finding or innovation) or indirect, contributing to a more complex change in clinical practice and healthcare organization, both having other contextual factors. The channels used to transfer this new knowledge to clinical practice are complex. Local scientific societies and the relationships between researchers and decision-makers can play a very important role. Specifically, the relationships between managers and research teams and the mutual knowledge of their activity have shown to be effective in applying research funding to practice and decision-making. Finally the facilitating factors and barriers identified by the respondents are closely related to the idiosyncrasy of the human relations between the different stakeholders involved.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Solans-Domènech et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Hanney SR, Gonzalez-Block MA: Yes, research can inform health policy; but can we bridge the 'Do-Knowing It's Been Done' gap? Health Res Policy Syst 2011, 9:23. BioMed Central Full Text
• [2]Finne H, Day A, Piccaluga A, Spithoven A, Walter P, Wellen D: A Composite Indicator for Knowledge Transfer. Report from the European Commission's Expert Group on Knowledge Transfer Indicators. Brussels: EC; 2011.
• [3]Banks G: Evidence-based policy-making: What is it? How do we get it?. Canberra: Productivity Commission; 2009.
• [4]Hanney SR, Gonzalez-Block MA, Buxton MJ, Kogan M: The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Res Policy Syst 2003, 1:2. BioMed Central Full Text
• [5]Agency for Health Research and Quality (AHRQ): Translating Research into Practice (TRIP)-II. Washington DC: AHQR; 2001.
• [6]Stryer D, Tunis S, Hubbard H, Clancy C: The outcomes of outcomes and effectiveness research: impacts and lessons from the first decade. Health Serv Res 2000, 35:977-993.
• [7]Grant J, Brutscher PB, Kirk SE, Butler L, Wooding S: Capturing research impacts a review of international practice. Cambridge (United Kingdom): RAND Europe; 2010.
• [8]Brutscher PB, Wooding S, Grant J: Health research evaluation frameworks: an international comparison. Cambridge (United Kingdom): RAND Europe; 2008. http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR629 webcite
• [9]Buxton M, Hanney S, Jones T: Estimating the economic value to societies of the impact of health research: a critical review. Bull World Health Organ 2004, 82:733-739.
• [10]Adam P, Permanyer-Miralda G: Més enllà de les publicacions científiques: un model per a l'avaluació de l'impacte social de la recerca mèdica. Annals de Medicina 2009, 92:81-86.
• [11]Buxton M, Hanney S: How can payback from health services research be assessed? J Health Serv Res Policy 1996, 1:35-43.
• [12]Buxton M, Haney S: Developing and applying the Payback Framework to assess the socioeconomic impact of health research. Med Clin (Barc) 2008, 131:36-41.
• [13]Frank C, Nason E: Health research: measuring the social, health and economic benefits. CMAJ 2009, 180:528-534.
• [14]Panel on the return on investments in health research: Making and impact. A preferred framework and indicators to measure returns on investment in health research. Ottawa, ON (Canada): Canadian Academy of Health Science (CAHS); 2009. http://www.cahs-acss.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ROI_FullReport.pdf webcite
• [15]European Science Foundation: Implementation of Medical Research in Clinical Practice. Strasbourg: ESF; 2011.
• [16]Woolf SH: The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA 2008, 299:211-213.
• [17]Adam P, Solans-Domènech M, Pons JMV, Aymerich M, Berra S, Guillamon I, Sánchez E, Permanyer-Miralda G: Assessment of the impact of a clinical and health services research call in Catalonia. Research Evaluation 2012, 21:319-328.
• [18]Meuleners LB, Lee AH, Binns CW, Lower A: Quality of life for adolescents: assessing measurement properties using structural equation modelling. Qual Life Res 2003, 12:283-290.
• [19]Weiss AP: Measuring the impact of medical research: moving from outputs to outcomes. Am J Psychiatry 2007, 164:206-214.
• [20]Kalucy EC, Jackson-Bowers E, McIntyre E, Reed R: The feasibility of determining the impact of primary health care research projects using the Payback Framework. Health Res Policy Syst 2009, 7:11. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Reed RL, Kalucy EC, Jackson-Bowers E, McIntyre E: What research impacts do Australian primary health care researchers expect and achieve? Health Res Policy Syst 2011, 9:40. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Wimbush E, Beeston C: Contribution Analysis. What is it and what does it offer impact evaluation? The Evaluator [Internet]. Edinburgh: NHS Health Scotland; 2010:19-24. http://www.jitscotland.org.uk/downloads/1321878568-Contribution%20Analysis%20Article%20in%20The%20Evaluator%202010.pdf webcite
• [23]Denis JL, Lomas J: Convergent evolution: the academic and policy roots of collaborative research. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003, 8(Suppl 2):1-6.
• [24]Lomas J: Using 'linkage and exchange' to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Aff (Millwood) 2000, 19:236-240.
• [25]Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A: Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 2002, 7:239-244.
• [26]Assessment of Health Research Fund Outputs and Outcomes: 1995–2003. Calgary (Canada): Barrington Research Group; 2003.
• [27]Ioannidis JP: Materializing research promises: opportunities, priorities and conflicts in translational medicine. J Transl Med 2004, 2:5. BioMed Central Full Text
• [28]Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Waye PB: Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q 2007, 85:729-768.
• [29]Hanney SR, Grant J, Wooding S, Buxton MJ: Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: the impact of funding by the UK's Arthritis Research Campaign. Health Res Policy Syst 2004, 2:4. BioMed Central Full Text
• [30]Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care. Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 2000, 320:50-52.
• [31]Verhoef MJ, Mulkins A, Kania A, Findlay-Reece B, Mior S: Identifying the barriers to conducting outcomes research in integrative health care clinic settings–a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2010, 10:14. BioMed Central Full Text
• [32]Jewell CJ, Bero LA: "Developing good taste in evidence": facilitators of and hindrances to evidence-informed health policymaking in state government. Milbank Q 2008, 86:177-208.