Achieving consensus on the key elements of a nurse-led multidisciplinary chronic heart failure service in Thailand: An e-Delphi study.

AIMS: To describe the outcomes of an e(electronic)-Delphi survey used to achieve consensus on the essential elements that should be included in a multidisciplinary, nurse-led service for patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). DESIGN: The study design was based on a three-round e-Delphi survey. METHODS: A series of three survey rounds were used to gather expert opinions and achieve consensus on the key elements that should be included in a CHF disease management program from a sample of healthcare professionals and organizational leaders with expertise in existing CHF services. Consensus for each item was defined as at least 90% agreement. RESULTS: There were 20 participants (18 healthcare professionals and 2 organizational leaders) in round-1, 22 (20 healthcare professionals and 2 organizational leaders) in round-2, and 17 (15 healthcare professionals and 2 organizational leaders) in round-3. Fifteen participants attended a final online meeting (13 healthcare professionals and 2 organizational leaders). Consensus was obtained on five essential components: (i) consumer education, (ii) treatment optimization using a multidisciplinary approach, (iii) discharge planning, (iv) provision of supportive community care and (v) mechanisms to respond to early symptoms of decompensated CHF. CONCLUSION: Participants focused on mechanisms to improve treatment effectiveness, patient and family knowledge, communication between healthcare providers and supportive care in the community. The proposed model of care may be useful to other health service providers who are designing or adapting CHF models of care for the South-East Asian environment. IMPACT: This research provides a solid basis for using a Delphi method to resolve the challenges and issues of transferring global model-based recommendations in CHF knowledge. The Delphi method proved successful as an important step in developing a culturally acceptable model of chronic care that meets the goals of local healthcare providers.

Desired dementia care towards end of life: Development and experiences of implementing a new approach to improve person-centred dementia care.

AIMS: To describe the co-creation of the 'Desired Dementia Care Towards End of Life' (DEDICATED) approach to improve person-centred palliative care for individuals with dementia and to describe the experiences of healthcare professionals during the approach's implementation. METHODS: A needs assessment, comprising both qualitative and quantitative studies, informed palliative care needs of healthcare professionals, family caregivers and individuals with dementia. The approach was co-created with healthcare and education professionals, guided by the findings. Then, healthcare professionals were trained to implement the approach in their organizations. From April to June 2022, semi-structured interviews with actively engaged professionals were analysed using Conventional Content Analysis. RESULTS: The needs assessment yielded six key themes: (1) raising palliative care awareness, (2) familiarization with a person with dementia, (3) communication about future care preferences, (4) managing pain and responsive behaviour, (5) enhancing interprofessional collaboration in advance care planning and (6) improving interprofessional collaboration during transitions to nursing homes. Interviews with 17 healthcare professionals revealed that active involvement in co-creating or providing feedback facilitated implementation. Overall, the DEDICATED approach was perceived as a valuable toolkit for optimizing palliative care for people with dementia and their loved ones. CONCLUSION: Co-creating the DEDICATED approach with healthcare professionals facilitated implementation in daily practice. The approach was considered helpful in enhancing person-centred palliative dementia care. IMPACT STATEMENT: This study underscores the importance of active involvement of healthcare professionals in the research and development of new interventions or tools for palliative care, which can influence the successful implementation, dissemination and sustained usage of the developed tools. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: The developed approach can improve person-centred palliative care for individuals with dementia, ultimately improving their quality of life and that of their loved ones. REPORTING METHOD: This study used the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. PATIENT OF PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

The role of healthcare leaders in implementing equitable clinical academic pathways for nurses: An integrative review.

AIM: To identify and synthesize empirical evidence on the role of healthcare leaders in the development of equitable clinical academic pathways for nurses. DESIGN: Integrative literature review. DATA SOURCES: Literature was searched using CINAHL, PubMed, ProQuest and Google Scholar databases. REVIEW METHODS: A total of 114 eligible articles published between 2010 and2022 were screened, 16 papers were selected. RESULTS: Results highlighted the need for consistent national, regional, and organizational policy approaches to developing clinical academic careers for nurses. Government health departments and National Health boards must focus on increasing engagement in research and evidence-based nursing practice for high-quality patient care. Discriminatory practices and attitudes were identified as barriers. Discrimination due to gender was evident, while the impact of race, ethnicity, and other social categories of identity are under-researched. Educational leaders must unravel misconceptions about research, highlighting its relevance to patient care and bedside nurses' work. Academic leaders together with executive nurses, research funders and professional nursing bodies must create appropriately remunerated career structures. Transformative approaches are required to develop the clinical academic nurse role and understand its value in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Multiple elements exist within complex systems that healthcare leaders can navigate collaboratively to develop and implement clinical nurse academic roles. This requires vision, acknowledgement of the value of nursing research and the importance of evidence-based research infrastructures. IMPACT: Findings highlight the collaborative role of healthcare leaders as critical to the success of critical academic careers for nurses. This review can inform those still to formalize this innovative role for nurses. REPORTING METHOD: The review complies with the PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews. This paper contributes evidence about the healthcare leader's role in developing clinical academic pathways for nurses to the wider global clinical community. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution was included in this review.

Exploring NICU nurses' views of a novel genetic point-of-care test identifying neonates at risk of antibiotic-induced ototoxicity: A qualitative study.

AIM: To explore the views of neonatal intensive care nursing staff on the deliverability of a novel genetic point-of-care test detecting a genetic variant associated with antibiotic-induced ototoxicity. DESIGN: An interpretive, descriptive, qualitative interview study. METHODS: Data were collected using semi-structured interviews undertaken between January and November 2020. Participants were neonatal intensive care nursing staff taking part in the Pharmacogenetics to Avoid Loss of Hearing trial. RESULTS: Thematic analysis resulted in four themes: perceived clinical utility; the golden hour; point-of-care device; training and support. Recommendations were made to streamline the protocol and ongoing training and support were considered key to incorporating the test into routine care. CONCLUSION: Exploring the views of nurses involved in the delivery of the point-of-care test was essential in its implementation. By the study endpoint, all participants could see the value of routine clinical introduction of the point-of care test. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Nurses are in a key position to support the delivery of point-of-care genetic testing into mainstream settings. This study has implications for the successful integration of other genetic point-of-care tests in acute healthcare settings. IMPACT: The study will help to tailor the training and support required for routine deployment of the genetic point-of-care test. The study has relevance for nurses involved in the development and delivery of genetic point-of-care tests in other acute hospital settings. REPORTING METHOD: This qualitative study adheres to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research EQUATOR guidelines and utilizes COREQ and SRQR checklists. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: All staff working on the participating neonatal intensive care units were trained to use the genetic point-of-care test. All inpatients on the participating units were eligible to have testing via the point-of-care test. The Pharmacogenetics to Avoid Loss of Hearing Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group provided valuable feedback. TRIAL AND PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Registered within the University of Manchester. Ethics approval reference numbers: IRAS: 253102 REC reference: 19/NW/0400. Also registered with the ISRCTN ref: ISRCTN13704894.

The impact of a clinical academic nurse researcher in critical care: A 1-year service review.

AIMS: To outline the activity and impact from implementing a clinical academic nurse researcher in a multi-centre critical care unit. DESIGN: A prospective exploratory activity audit informed by the Plan, Do, Study, Act framework. METHODS: Quantitative data on clinical academic activity, from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024, were collected in a Microsoft Excel © [2022, version 16.66.1] spreadsheet. Activity narratives were detailed in qualitative data and the impact categorized. RESULTS: A total of 1500 clinical academic activity hours were logged (accounting for annual leave entitlement and sickness). Of these, 973 h were directly categorized within clinical academic activity. Most frequently undertaken clinical academic activities were academic writing (17.6%), data collection/analysis (9.6%), grant and funding workup (6.8%), Intensive Care Unit service development (6.6%), clinical activity (5.2%) and local level capability and capacity (4.9%) and other supportive tasks such as administration, unscheduled meetings, critical planning time and peer support (38%). Improvements broadly mapped onto five healthcare improvement domains; organizational, process design, data optimization and utilization, evidenced-based practice, and patients/staff impact. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate system mechanisms afforded by the clinical academic role that have not been explored within the contemporary literature. A nursing clinical academic demonstrates impact across the broad organization whilst increasing the visibility of nursing work and the potential for system resilience. In conclusion, our service review underscores the transformative potential of clinical academics in shaping the future of healthcare. Utilizing their expertise and contributions paves the way for innovation, excellence and sustainability in patient care. IMPACT: This review has provided clarity about clinical academic activity of a nurse researcher during the first year. There is international impact of this work for both clinical academics who may be evaluating such roles and healthcare management developing similar roles locally. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Developing and testing a reflection method for implementation of the informal care guideline in community nursing: Design-based research.

AIM: To develop a reflection method for community nurses and certified nursing assistants to support the implementation of the Dutch Informal Care guideline in daily care. DESIGN: Design-based research. METHODS: A design group and four test groups of community nurses and nursing assistants were formed to develop a reflection method that aligns with the needs and preferences of its end-users. The design and test group meetings were video recorded. The video data were iteratively discussed and analysed thematically to adapt and refine the method and to identify its key features. RESULTS: A final reflection method was developed. Five main themes were identified from the analysis: the group, reflective triggers, knowledge about the guidelines, the coach and preconditions. The themes are linked to nine key features representing the building blocks of the reflection method. The key features are group size, participants with different (educational) backgrounds, pairs of participants, expressing thoughts, video feedback, reflection game, making the connection with the guideline, coaching as a process facilitator and meeting organizational and contextual conditions for implementation. CONCLUSION: An evidence- and practice-based reflection method for community nurses and certified nursing assistants is developed to support the implementation. By involving community nurses and certified nursing assistants, the method closely matches their needs and preferences. Critical elements of the reflection method are a game element, video feedback and working in pairs in a group of participants from different (educational) backgrounds. Guidance is needed to make the transfer from theory to practice. IMPACT: A reflection method for community nurses and certified nursing assistants was developed to enhance care work according to guideline recommendations, aiming to improve the care provided by informal caregivers. REPORT METHOD: The COREQ guideline was used. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This reflection method was developed in close collaboration with all stakeholders during the entire study.

Failed implementation of a nursing intervention to support family caregivers: An evaluation study using Normalization Process Theory.

AIM: To evaluate the failed implementation of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool Intervention for family caregivers in end-of-life care, within a trial context using Normalization Process Theory (NPT). DESIGN: An evaluation study was conducted to learn lessons from our trial, which was not successful due to the low number of participants. The evaluation study utilized various data sources, including published data from interviews and questionnaires, and unpublished data derived from emails and conversation notes. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected. Thematic analysis was conducted guided by the NPT framework. This framework emphasizes that successful implementation of an intervention relies on its 'normalization', consisting of four constructs: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. RESULTS: Coherence (sense making): Nurses felt the intervention could contribute to their competence in assessing family caregivers' needs, but some were unsure how it differed from usual practice. Cognitive participation (relational work): Nurse champions played a crucial role in building a community of practice. However, sustaining this community was challenging due to staff turnover and shortages. Collective action (work done to enable the intervention): Nurses felt the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool training enabled them to improve their support of family caregivers. However, contextual factors complicated implementation, such as being used to a patient rather than a family-focused approach and a high workload. Reflexive monitoring (appraisal of the intervention): Positive experiences of the nurses with the intervention motivated them to implement it. However, the research context made nurses hesitant to recruit family caregivers because of the potential burden of participation. CONCLUSION: Although the intervention demonstrated potential to assist nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers, its integration into daily practice was not optimal. Contextual factors, such as a patient-focused approach to care and the research context, hampered normalization of the intervention. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Assessing and considering contextual factors that may influence implementation of a complex care intervention is needed. The NPT provided a valuable framework for evaluating the implementation process in our study. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? This evaluation study analysed the factors that promoted or hindered the implementation of a nursing intervention to support family caregivers in end-of-life care. What were the main findings? Both the intervention and the intervention training have potential and value for nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers. However, the implementation faced challenges due to organizational factors and the research context, including recruitment. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This insight is valuable for all stakeholders involved in implementing complex nursing interventions, including researchers, nurses and funders. REPORTING METHOD: This study has adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines: Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered on the Dutch Trial Register (NL7702).

Describing a programme of implementation-effectiveness research on the organization and implementation of frontline nursing care delivery into diverse heath systems.

AIMS: The longitudinal programme of research described in this paper seeks to generate knowledge about factors influencing the implementation of a system-level intervention, the clinical nurse leader care model, involving nurses as leaders at the frontlines of care and the outcomes achievable with successful implementation. The research programme has the following aims, (a) to clarify clinical nurse leader practice, (b) develop and empirically validate a translational model of frontline care delivery that includes clinical nurse leader practice and (c) delineate the patterns of and critical outcomes of successful implementation of the clinical nurse leader care model. DESIGN: This programme of research follows a knowledge-building trajectory involving multiple study designs in both qualitative (grounded theory, case study) and quantitative (descriptive, correlational and quasi-experimental) traditions. METHODS: Multiple mixed methods within a system-based participatory framework were used to conduct this programme of implementation-effectiveness research. RESULTS: Findings are demonstrating how the clinical nurse leader care model, as a complex system-level intervention, can be implemented in diverse healthcare contexts to make a difference to patient care quality and safety. Findings also contribute to implementation science, helping to better understand the dynamic interdependencies between implementation, the interventions implemented and the contexts in which they are implemented. CONCLUSION: Findings translate into sets of evidence-informed implementation 'recipes' that health systems can match to their specific contexts and needs. This allows health systems to take on strategies that both maximize resource impact within their existing structures and support achieving intended outcomes. IMPLICATION: This programme of research is producing actionable implementation and outcome evidence about ways to organize nursing knowledge and practice into care models that can be successfully adopted within real-world healthcare settings to achieve safer and higher quality patient care.

Youth, caregiver and healthcare professional perspectives on planning the implementation of a trauma-informed care programme: A qualitative study.

AIMS: To explore youth, caregiver and staff perspectives on their vision of trauma-informed care, and to identify and understand potential considerations for the implementation of a trauma-informed care programme in an inpatient mental health unit within a paediatric hospital. DESIGN AND METHODS: We applied the Interpretive Description approach, guided by complexity theory and the Implementation Roadmap, and used Applied Thematic Analysis methods. FINDINGS: Twenty-five individuals participated in individual or group interviews between March and June 2022, including 21 healthcare professionals, 3 youth and 1 caregiver. We identified two overarching themes. The first theme, 'Understanding and addressing the underlying reasons for distress', related to participants' understanding and vision of TIC in the current setting comprising: (a) 'Participants' understanding of TIC'; (b) 'Trauma screening and trauma processing within TIC'; (c) 'Taking "a more individualized approach"'; (d) 'Unit programming'; and (e) "Connecting to the community". The second theme, 'Factors that support or limit successful TIC implementation' comprises: (a) 'The need for a broad "cultural shift"'; (b) 'The physical environment on the unit'; and (c) 'Factors that may limit successful implementation'. CONCLUSION: We identified five key domains to consider within trauma-informed care implementation: (a) the centrality of engagement with youth, caregivers and staff in trauma-informed care delivery and implementation, (b) trauma-informed care core programme components, (c) factors that may support or limit success in implementing trauma-informed care within the mental health unit and (d) hospital-wide and (e) the importance of intersectoral collaboration (partnering with external organizations and sectors). IMPACT: When implementing TIC, there is an ongoing need to increase clarity regarding TIC interventions and implementation initiatives. Youth, caregiver and healthcare professional participants shared considerations important for planning the delivery and implementation of trauma-informed care in their setting. We identified five key domains to consider within trauma-informed care implementation: (a) the centrality of relational engagement, (b) trauma-informed care programme components, (c) factors that may support or limit successful implementation of trauma-informed care within the mental health unit and (d) hospital-wide and (e) the importance of intersectoral collaboration. Organizations wishing to implement trauma-informed care should consider ongoing engagement with all relevant knowledge user groups throughout the process. REPORTING METHOD: Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The local hospital research institute's Patient and Family Advisory Committee reviewed the draft study methods and provided feedback.

Implementation of Positive Advanced Recovery Connections in Primary and Secondary Mental Health Care-A Registered Advanced Nurse Practitioner-Led Initiative.

AIM(S): This study reports on the implementation of a registered advanced nurse practitioner intervention. Aims include improving access, service user outcomes and integration between primary and secondary care. DESIGN: This paper reports the quantitative results of a mixed methods implementation study. Qualitative data are reported separately. The PARiHS framework informs the implementation process itself, with considerations for nurses and other healthcare professionals explored. METHODS: The CORE-OM 34 item rating scale was administered both pre- and post-intervention. Service user attendances in secondary care was monitored. RESULTS: Findings suggest that the intervention was associated with clinically significant improvements in global or generic distress, reported by service users, as evidenced by changes in the CORE-OM scores. Access to care was recorded at an average of 3.6 days. Implementation science supported effective and safe implementation with clear governance structures. CONCLUSION: Registered advanced nurse practice in mental health clinics which provide full episodes of care results in improved integration and may be associated with positive patient outcomes. Implementation science is taught on Irish nursing programmes and this is important if innovative services are to be embedded in the healthcare system. IMPACT: The development of a model of care for mental health Registered Advanced Nurse Practitioners at the interface of primary and secondary care settings may be merited. Positive Advanced Recovery Connections may be associated with improving mental health outcomes and bolstering integration of primary and secondary care services. The utilisation of implementation science highlights the need for collaboration with all stakeholders to overcome barriers and recognise facilitators to attain the necessary model of integrated care. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Peer recovery input was provided by members of the service Recovery College, with participation evident in all stages of the project. The psychosocial assessment template was also co-designed.

Reflections on the implementation and evaluation of a system-wide improvement programme based on the fundamentals of care: Lessons learned.

AIM: To demonstrate how implementing a system-wide measurement and improvement programme can make the delivery of the Fundamentals of Care visible in practice. DESIGN: Discussion paper. DATA SOURCES: A retrospective evaluation of the experience of implementing a system-wide peer review programme using the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Implementing this programme engages nursing leaders at all levels in fundamental care delivery, evaluation and improvement. It positions nursing leaders as accountable for and champions of fundamental care. CONCLUSION: The peer review programme offers a solution to the complex challenge of measuring the fundamentals of care in practice. Successful implementations of this programme at two New Zealand inpatient sites have shown positive results in improved care and patient experience. This makes it worthy of consideration for other health organizations. Nursing leadership has proven to be critical to success. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework highlights the components that assist with successful implementation and assists in presenting a case for change. IMPACT: This paper addressed the problem of the lack of action and dearth of quality, integrated data, visibility of the patient experience and the contribution of nursing leadership in an inpatient setting. Findings indicate that the peer review programme is translatable, modifiable and sensitive to ethnicity and disability. Using the implementation framework to evaluate the process has provided a guide for future implementations.

Improving patient's intensive care admission through multidisciplinary simulation-based crisis resource management: A qualitative study.

AIM: To explore nurses' and physicians' experiences of simulation-based training in a crisis resource management quality improvement intervention on intensive care admission. BACKGROUND: Quantitative studies have documented that staffs' non-technical skills are improved after simulation-based training in crisis resource management interventions. Experienced-based consensus led to development of a quality improvement intervention based on principles of crisis resource management and tested in simulation-based training to enhance staffs' non-technical skills. However, the impact on staff is unexplored, leaving little understanding of the relationship between simulation-based training in crisis resource management interventions and changes in non-technical skills. DESIGN: A qualitative study with a hermeneutical approach. METHODS: Data consisted of semi-structured interviews with physicians (n = 5) and nurses (n = 15) with maximum variation in work experience. Data were collected 3 months after implementation and analysed using thematic analysis. The COREQ guideline was applied. RESULTS: The analysis revealed three themes: prioritising core clinical activities and patient centredness; transition into practice; and reflection on patient safety. These themes reflected staff's experiences of the intervention and implementation process, which evolved through prioritising core clinical activities that facilitated the transition into clinical practice and staff's reflection on patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Prioritising core clinical activities were facilitated by clear communication, predefined roles and better teamwork. Transition into practice stimulated professional growth through feedback. Reflection on patient safety created a new understanding on how a new structure of intensive care admission could be implemented. Collectively, this indicated a joint understanding of admissions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Findings enables health care professionals to understand how the intervention can contribute to improve quality of care in management of intensive care admission. Improving non-technical skills are vital in high-quality admissions, which supported a structured process and a collaborative professional standard of admissions. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None.

A clinical-academic partnership to develop a family management intervention for parents of preterm infants.

AIMS: To examine the critical role that an academic clinical partnership played in the development and refinement of a family management intervention in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). BACKGROUND: Clinical-academic partnerships enable earlier infusion of implementation science principles into development of evidence-based interventions, yet partners often report difficulty leveraging resources, personnel and expertise to create beneficial outcomes for all. DESIGN: Longitudinal qualitative descriptive design. METHODS: To develop and refine the intervention, designated time was taken during meetings of the NICU's Parent Partnership Council (PPC), a committee comprised of nursing, physician and allied health leadership and former NICU parents. Partnership was also achieved by having bedside clinical nurses, in addition to medical and nursing students, participate as research team members. Qualitative data were collected via email, research team and Council meetings, and informal individual chats with key stakeholders (N = 25) and NICU mothers (N = 22). Qualitative data were analysed deductively using thematic analysis based on MacPhee's partnership logic model and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) model. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research checklist guided our work. RESULTS: During Council meetings, the clinical-academic nurse, Director of Family-Integrated Care and Council members identified the need for a family management intervention, and worked together to develop and refine PREEMIE PROGRESS. Mothers found the intervention had numerous strengths and perceived a benefit knowing they helped future parents. CONCLUSIONS: This work was only possible by leveraging both the university's technology/research resources and the clinical expertise of the NICU staff and PPC. Co-authored presentations, publications and grant funding continued this NICU's legacy in family-centred care and helped shape the clinical-academic nurse's career. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Clinical-academic partnerships can promote excellence in nursing practice, research and education through swifter knowledge translation and earlier infusion of implementation science principles into the development of evidence-based nursing interventions.

Embedding biodiversity research into climate adaptation policy and practice.

Addressing climate change risks requires collaboration and engagement across all sectors of society. In particular, effective partnerships are needed between research scientists producing new knowledge, policy-makers and practitioners who apply conservation actions on the ground. We describe the implementation of a model for increasing the application and useability of biodiversity research in climate adaptation policy and practice. The focus of the program was to increase the ability of a state government agency and natural resource practitioners in Australia to manage and protect biodiversity in a changing climate. The model comprised a five-stage process for enhancing impact (i) initiation of research projects that addressed priority conservation policy and management issues; (ii) co-design of the research using a collaborative approach involving multiple stakeholders; (iii) implementation of the research and design of decision tools and web-based resources; (iv) collaborative dissemination of the tools and resources via government and community working groups; and (v) evaluation of research impact. We report on the model development and implementation, and critically reflect on the model's impact. We share the lessons learnt from the challenges of operating within a stakeholder group with diverse objectives and criteria for success, and provide a template for creating an environmental research program with real world impact.

Bridging research and practice in conservation.

Calls for biodiversity conservation practice to be more evidence based are growing, and we agree evidence use in conservation practice needs improvement. However, evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. In medicine, unlike in conservation, a well-established and well-funded layer of intermediary individuals and organizations engage with medical practitioners, synthesize primary research relevant to decision making, and make evidence easily accessible. These intermediaries prepare targeted evidence summaries and distribute them to practitioners faced with time-sensitive and value-laden decisions. To be effective, these intermediaries, who we refer to as evidence bridges, should identify research topics based on the priorities of practitioners; synthesize evidence; prepare and distribute easy-to-find and easy-to-use evidence summaries; and develop and maintain networks of connections with researchers and practitioners. Based on a review of the literature regarding evidence intermediaries in conservation and environmental management, as well as an anonymous questionnaire searching for such organizations, we found few intermediaries that met all these criteria. Few evidence bridges that do exist are unable to reach most conservation practitioners, which include resource managers in government and industry, conservation organizations, and farmers and other private landowners. We argue that the lack of evidence bridges from research to practitioners contributes to evidence complacency and limits the use of evidence in conservation action. Nevertheless, several existing organizations help reduce the gap between evidence and practice and could serve as a foundation for building additional components of evidence bridges in conservation. Although evidence bridges need expertise in research and evidence synthesis, they also require expertise in identifying and communicating with the community of practitioners most in need of clear and concise syntheses of evidence. Article Impact Statement: Evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. We call for intermediary evidence bridges.

Vinculación entre la Investigación y la Práctica en la Conservación Resumen Cada vez existen más peticiones para que las prácticas de conservación de la biodiversidad estén más basadas en evidencias, además de que apoyamos la idea de que el uso de evidencias en la práctica de la conservación necesita mejorar. Sin embargo, la conservación basada en la evidencia no se logrará sin un acceso mejorado a las evidencias. En la medicina, no como en la conservación, un estrato bien establecido y financiado de individuos y organizaciones intermediarias interactúan con los médicos, sintetizan las investigaciones primarias relevantes para la toma de decisiones y hacen que las evidencias sean de fácil acceso. Estos intermediarios preparan resúmenes de evidencias específicas y los distribuyen a los médicos que enfrentan decisiones urgentes y muy valiosas. Para que sean efectivos, estos intermediarios, a quienes nos referimos como puentes de evidencias, deben poder identificar los temas de estudio con base en las prioridades de los practicantes, sintetizar evidencias, preparar y distribuir resúmenes fáciles de encontrar y fáciles de usar, y desarrollar y mantener redes de conexiones con los investigadores y los practicantes. Con base en una revisión de la literatura correspondiente a los intermediarios de evidencias en la conservación y el manejo ambiental, así como en un cuestionario anónimo que busca a dichas organizaciones, encontramos a pocos intermediarios que cumplieran con estos criterios. Los pocos puentes de evidencias que existen no son capaces de llegar a la mayoría de los practicantes de la conservación, los cuales incluyen a los gestores de recursos en el gobierno y en la industria, a las organizaciones de conservación y a los agricultores y otros terratenientes privados. Argumentamos que la falta de puentes de evidencia entre los investigadores y los practicantes contribuye a la indulgencia de evidencias y limita el uso de evidencias en las acciones de conservación. Sin embargo, varias organizaciones existentes ayudan a reducir la brecha entre la evidencia y la práctica y podrían funcionar como base para la construcción de componentes adicionales para los puentes de evidencia en la conservación. Aunque los puentes de evidencias necesitan experiencia con la investigación y con la síntesis de evidencias, también requieren experiencia con la identificación de y comunicación con la comunidad de practicantes que más necesitan una síntesis clara y concisa de la evidencia.

Barriers and enablers of recognition and response to deteriorating patients in the acute hospital setting: A theory-driven interview study using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

AIM: To explore barriers and enablers of recognition and response to signs of patient deterioration by nursing staff in an acute hospital. DESIGN: A theory-driven interview study underpinned by the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change. METHODS: Between 07/01/2019 and 18/12/2019 a purposive sample of registered nurses and healthcare assistants was recruited to participate in a semi-structured (audio-recorded) interview, to explore the determinants of seven specified behaviours of the afferent limb. Anonymised transcripts were deductively coded (using the 14 Theoretical Domains Framework domains as coding categories) and then extracts within each domain were inductively analysed to synthesise belief statements and themes. Prioritisation criteria from published literature were applied. RESULTS: Thirty-two semi-structured interviews were conducted. From 1,888 quotes, 184 belief statements and 66 themes were synthesised. One hundred and forty-six belief statements, represented by 58 themes, met prioritisation criteria. Nine domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework were of high importance: Knowledge; Social, Professional Role and Identity; Beliefs about Consequences; Reinforcement; Intentions; Goals; Memory, Attention and Decision Processes; Environment, Context and Resources and Social Influences. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers and enablers most likely to impact on nursing staff afferent limb behaviour were identified in nine domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework.

Metal hypersensitivity screening among frontline healthcare workers-A descriptive study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The study aims were to (a) assess allergy screening practices, (b) determine the awareness of metal hypersensitivity among frontline healthcare workers and (c) examine perceived barriers to implementing metal hypersensitivity screening into clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Adverse device-related events, such as hypersensitivity to metals, are well documented in the literature. Hypersensitivity to metal is a type IV T-cell-mediated reaction that can occur after cardiac, orthopaedic, dental, gynaecological and neurosurgical procedures where a device with metal components is implanted into the body. Patients with hypersensitivity to metal are likely to experience delayed healing, implant failure and stent restenosis. Identifying patients with a history of metal hypersensitivity reaction could mitigate the risk of poor outcomes following device implant. Yet in clinical practice, healthcare workers do not routinely ask about the history of metal hypersensitivity when documenting allergies. The existing literature does not report why this is not included in allergy assessment. DESIGN: Following the STROBE checklist, a cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted. METHODS: Frontline healthcare workers were recruited using professional contacts and social online media to complete an online questionnaire. Quantitative data were summarised descriptively while thematic analysis was used to examine barriers to implementation. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-five participants from 14 countries completed the questionnaire, with the majority (187/54%) practicing in Canada, in general medicine and intensive care units. Ninety per cent of the participants did not routinely ask about metal hypersensitivity when evaluating allergy history. Of the respondents, 86% were unaware of the association between metal hypersensitivity and poor patient outcomes. After presented with the evidence, 81% indicated they were likely or very likely to incorporate the evidence into their clinical practice. Common themes about barriers to implementing were 'Standards of Practice', 'Knowledge' and 'Futility of Screening'. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest lack of awareness as the main reason for not including metal in routine allergy assessment.

Shared ways of thinking in Brazil about the science-practice interface in ecology and conservation.

The debate in the literature on the science-practice interface suggests a diversity of opinions on how to link science and practice to improve conservation. Understanding this diversity is key to addressing unequal power relations, avoiding the consideration of only dominant views, and identifying strategies to link science and practice. In turn, linking science and practice should promote conservation decisions that are socially robust and scientifically informed. To identify and describe the viewpoints of scientists and decision makers on how the science-practice interface should work in order to improve conservation decisions, we interviewed Brazilian scientists (ecologists and conservation scientists, n = 11) and decision makers (n = 11). We used Q methodology and asked participants to rank their agreement with 48 statements on how the science-practice interface should work in order to improve conservation decisions. We used principal component analysis to identify shared viewpoints. The predominant viewpoint, shared by scientists and decision makers, was characterized by valuing the integration of scientific and strategic knowledge to address environmental problems. The second viewpoint, held mostly by decision makers, was distinguished by assigning great importance to science in the decision-making process and calling for problem-relevant research. The third viewpoint, shared only by scientists, was characterized by an unwillingness to collaborate and a perception of scientists as producers of knowledge that may help decision makers. Most participants agreed organizations should promote collaboration and that actors and knowledge from both science and practice are relevant. Disagreements concerned specific roles assigned to actors, willingness to collaborate, and organizational and institutional arrangements considered effective to link science and practice. Our results suggest there is ample room for collaborations and that impediments lie mainly in existing organizations and formal institutional arrangements rather than in negative attitudes between scientists and decision makers.

Formas de Pensar Compartidas en Brasil sobre la Interrelación Ciencia-Práctica en la Ecología y la Conservación Resumen El debate en la literatura sobre la interrelación ciencia-práctica sugiere una diversidad de opiniones sobre cómo conectar a la ciencia con la práctica para mejorar la conservación. La comprensión de esta diversidad es clave para tratar con las relaciones desiguales de poder, evitar la considerar únicamente de los puntos de vista dominantes, e identificar las estrategias para vincular a la ciencia con la práctica. En cambio, la vinculación entre la ciencia y la práctica debería promover las decisiones de conservación que son socialmente fuertes y científicamente informadas. Entrevistamos a científicos (ecólogos y conservadores, n = 11) y tomadores de decisiones (n = 11) en Brasil para identificar y describir los puntos de vista de los científicos y de quienes toman las decisiones sobre cómo la interrelación ciencia-práctica debería trabajar con tal de mejorar las decisiones de conservación. Usamos la metodología Q y les pedimos a los participantes que clasificaran su acuerdo con 48 declaraciones sobre cómo la interrelación ciencia-práctica debería trabajar para mejorar las decisiones de conservación. Utilizamos un análisis de componentes principales para identificar los puntos de vista compartidos. El punto de vista predominante, compartido entre los científicos y quienes toman las decisiones, se caracterizó por el valor que le dio a la integración del conocimiento científico y el estratégico para tratar los problemas ambientales. El segundo punto de vista, compartido por la mayoría de quienes toman las decisiones, se distinguió por asignarle una gran importancia a la ciencia en cuanto al proceso de toma de decisiones y a la petición de investigación relevante para los problemas. El tercer punto de vista, compartido sólo entre los científicos, se caracterizó por el rechazo a colaborar y por la percepción de los científicos como productores de conocimiento que puede ayudar a quienes toman las decisiones. La mayoría de los participantes estuvo de acuerdo en que las organizaciones deberían promover la colaboración y en que los actores y el conocimiento científico y práctico son relevantes. Los desacuerdos estuvieron relacionados con los roles específicos asignados a los actores, el deseo de colaborar, y los arreglos institucionales y de organización considerados como efectivos para vincular a la ciencia con la práctica. Nuestros resultados sugieren que existe suficiente espacio para las colaboraciones y que los impedimentos se deben principalmente a las organizaciones existentes y a los arreglos institucionales formales en lugar de a las actitudes negativas entre los científicos y quienes toman las decisiones.

Knowledge implementation in health care management: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The gap between knowledge and practice is a global issue, which increases wasteful spending in healthcare. There are several models and frameworks to address this gap and try to solve the challenge. Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework highlights the interaction of three main elements: evidence, context and facilitation, to implement research into practice, successfully. This framework can use as a tool to evaluate the situation and guide the changing. This study conducted to explain the status of knowledge implementation in Iran's healthcare management system. METHODS: This qualitative study was done by using a directive content analysis approach through conducting in-depth, structured interviews with 15 health managers based on the PARIHS framework. Guiding questions were based on the three main elements of the framework: evidence, context and facilitation. The content of the interviews entered into the Qualitative Data Analysis software (MAXQDA version 10) and, then, analyzed. RESULTS: The most common source of evidence used by managers for decision-making was local information and previous experience. Evaluation more emphasized compared to other sub-elements of context, i.e. culture and leadership. In terms of facilitation, performing tasks by others was the dominant opinion. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that managers in the healthcare system of Iran use their own and other manager's experience and the local information for decision-making and have no ideas about facilitation.

Uncovering the processes of knowledge transformation: the example of local evidence-informed policy-making in United Kingdom healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare policy-makers are expected to develop 'evidence-based' policies. Yet, studies have consistently shown that, like clinical practitioners, they need to combine many varied kinds of evidence and information derived from divergent sources. Working in the complex environment of healthcare decision-making, they have to rely on forms of (practical, contextual) knowledge quite different from that produced by researchers. It is therefore important to understand how and why they transform research-based evidence into the knowledge they ultimately use. METHODS: We purposively selected four healthcare-commissioning organisations working with external agencies that provided research-based evidence to assist with commissioning; we interviewed a total of 52 people involved in that work. This entailed 92 interviews in total, each lasting 20-60 minutes, including 47 with policy-making commissioners, 36 with staff of external agencies, and 9 with freelance specialists, lay representatives and local-authority professionals. We observed 25 meetings (14 within the commissioning organisations) and reviewed relevant documents. We analysed the data thematically using a constant comparison method with a coding framework and developed structured summaries consisting of 20-50 pages for each case-study site. We iteratively discussed and refined emerging findings, including cross-case analyses, in regular research team meetings with facilitated analysis. Further details of the study and other results have been described elsewhere. RESULTS: The commissioners' role was to assess the available care provision options, develop justifiable arguments for the preferred alternatives, and navigate them through a tortuous decision-making system with often-conflicting internal and external opinion. In a multi-transactional environment characterised by interactive, pressurised, under-determined decisions, this required repeated, contested sensemaking through negotiation of many sources of evidence. Commissioners therefore had to subject research-based knowledge to multiple 'knowledge behaviours'/manipulations as they repeatedly re-interpreted and recrafted the available evidence while carrying out their many roles. Two key 'incorporative processes' underpinned these activities, namely contextualisation of evidence and engagement of stakeholders. We describe five Active Channels of Knowledge Transformation - Interpersonal Relationships, People Placement, Product Deployment, Copy, Adapt and Paste, and Governance and Procedure - that provided the organisational spaces and the mechanisms for commissioners to constantly reshape research-based knowledge while incorporating it into the eventual policies that configured local health services. CONCLUSIONS: Our new insights into the ways in which policy-makers and practitioners inevitably transform research-based knowledge, rather than simply translate it, could foster more realistic and productive expectations for the conduct and evaluation of research-informed healthcare provision.