Institute of Translational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Clin Transl Sci. 2012 Aug;5(4):351-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2012.00405.x. Epub 2012 Mar 27.
Improving patient outcomes in community-based settings is the goal of both the Clinical Translational Science Award program and practice-based quality improvement (QI) programs. Given this common goal, integrating QI and outcomes research is a promising strategy for developing, implementing, and evaluating clinical interventions. This article describes the challenges and strengths illuminated by the conduct of a combined research/QI study in a nascent practice-based research network. Challenges include research's exclusion of clinic patients who might benefit from the intervention; QI programs' less uniform approach to intervention implementation; and the need for both academic and clinically relevant products and publications. A major strength is the increased likelihood of both engaging clinical practices in research and developing successful clinical interventions. Required elements for success include identification of enthusiastic clinical research "champions," involvement of researchers with clinical experience, and adequate funding to support both research and clinical resources and dissemination. Combined Ql/research projects in the practice-based research environment have the potential to improve and shorten the cycle from good idea to improved clinical outcomes in real-world settings.
提高社区环境下的患者预后是临床转化科学奖项目和基于实践的质量改进(QI)项目的共同目标。鉴于这一共同目标,将 QI 和结果研究相结合是开发、实施和评估临床干预措施的一项有前途的策略。本文描述了在一个新兴的基于实践的研究网络中进行联合研究/QI 研究所揭示的挑战和优势。挑战包括研究排除了可能受益于干预的诊所患者;QI 计划在干预实施方面的方法不太统一;以及对学术和临床相关产品和出版物的需求。一个主要优势是增加了让临床实践参与研究和开发成功的临床干预措施的可能性。成功所需的要素包括确定热心的临床研究“冠军”,让具有临床经验的研究人员参与,以及为支持研究和临床资源以及传播提供充足的资金。在基于实践的研究环境中进行的联合 Ql/研究项目有可能改善并缩短从好主意到现实环境中改善临床结果的周期。