TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementation of evidence-based medicine: evaluation of the Promoting Action on Clinical Effectiveness programme.
AU - Dopson, S
AU - Locock, L
AU - Chambers, D
AU - Gabbay, J
PY - 2001/1/1
Y1 - 2001/1/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the Promoting Action on Clinical Effectiveness (PACE) programme, which sought to implement clinically effective practice in 16 local sites. METHODS: 182 semi-structured interviews, usually by telephone, with project team members, clinicians, and senior managers and representatives from the Department of Health and the King's Fund. RESULTS: The most influential factors were strong evidence, supportive opinion leaders and integration within a committed organization; without these factors, projects had little chance of success. Other factors (context analysis, professional involvement and good project management) emerged as important, supporting processes; their presence might be an additional help, but on their own they would not be enough to initiate change. A serious problem with any of them could have a strong adverse impact. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no simple formula for the factors that ensure successful implementation of research-based improvements to clinical practice, certain principles do seem to help. Time and resource need to be devoted to a period of local negotiation and adaptation of good research evidence based on a careful understanding of the local context, in which opinion leader influence is an important component of a well managed and preferably well integrated process of change.
AB - OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the Promoting Action on Clinical Effectiveness (PACE) programme, which sought to implement clinically effective practice in 16 local sites. METHODS: 182 semi-structured interviews, usually by telephone, with project team members, clinicians, and senior managers and representatives from the Department of Health and the King's Fund. RESULTS: The most influential factors were strong evidence, supportive opinion leaders and integration within a committed organization; without these factors, projects had little chance of success. Other factors (context analysis, professional involvement and good project management) emerged as important, supporting processes; their presence might be an additional help, but on their own they would not be enough to initiate change. A serious problem with any of them could have a strong adverse impact. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no simple formula for the factors that ensure successful implementation of research-based improvements to clinical practice, certain principles do seem to help. Time and resource need to be devoted to a period of local negotiation and adaptation of good research evidence based on a careful understanding of the local context, in which opinion leader influence is an important component of a well managed and preferably well integrated process of change.
U2 - 10.1258/1355819011927161
DO - 10.1258/1355819011927161
M3 - Article
SN - 1355-8196
VL - 6
SP - 23
EP - 31
JO - Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
JF - Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
ER -