Health and Social Services Systems, Knowledge Translation and Implementation Component of the Quebec SPOR SUPPORT Unit, Laval University, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.
Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale (CIUSSS-CN), Quebec, Québec, Canada.
Syst Rev. 2020 May 19;9(1):112. doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01382-x.
The literature on the implementation of knowledge products is extensive. However, this literature is still difficult to interpret for policymakers and other stakeholders when faced with choosing implementation strategies likely to bring about successful change in their health systems. This work has the particularity to examine the scope of this literature, and to clarify the effectiveness of implementation strategies for different knowledge products. Consequently, we aim to (1) determine the strengths and weaknesses of existing literature overviews; (2) produce a detailed portrait of the literature on implementation strategies for various knowledge products; and (3) assess the effectiveness of implementation strategies for each knowledge product identified and classify them.
We will use a three-phase approach consisting of a critical analysis of existing literature overviews, a systematic review of systematic reviews, and a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We will follow the Cochrane Methodology for each of the three phases. Our eligibility criteria are defined following a PICOS approach: Population, individuals or stakeholders participating in healthcare delivery, specifically, healthcare providers, caregivers, and end users; Intervention, any type of strategy aiming to implement a knowledge product including, but not limited to, a decision support tool, a clinical practice guideline, a policy brief, or a decision-making tool, a one-pager, or a health intervention; Comparison, any comparator will be considered; Outcomes, phases 1 and 2-any outcome related to implementation strategies including, but not limited to, the measures of adherence/fidelity to the use of knowledge products, their acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, adaptability, implementation costs, penetration/reach and sustainability; phase 3-any additional outcome related to patients (psychosocial, health behavioral, and clinical outcomes) or healthcare professionals (behavioral and performance outcomes); Setting, primary healthcare has to be covered. We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from their inception onwards. For each phase, two reviewers will independently perform the selection of studies, data extraction, and assess their methodological quality. We will analyze extracted data, and perform narrative syntheses, and meta-analyses when possible.
Our results could inform not only the overviews' methodology but also the development of an online platform for the implementation strategies of knowledge products. This platform could be useful for stakeholders in implementation science.
Protocol registered on Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/eb8w2/.
关于知识产品实施的文献很多。然而，当政策制定者和其他利益相关者面临选择可能为其卫生系统带来成功变革的实施策略时，这些文献仍然难以理解。这项工作的特殊性在于检查该文献的范围，并阐明针对各种知识产品的实施策略的有效性。因此，我们旨在：(1)确定现有文献综述的优缺点；(2)详细描述各种知识产品实施策略的文献；(3)评估为每个确定的知识产品实施策略的有效性，并对其进行分类。
我们将采用三阶段方法，包括对现有文献综述的批判性分析、对系统评价的系统评价，以及一系列系统评价和荟萃分析。我们将遵循 Cochrane 方法进行每一阶段。我们的入选标准是根据 PICOS 方法定义的：人群，参与医疗保健提供的个人或利益相关者，具体而言，医疗保健提供者、护理人员和最终用户；干预措施，旨在实施知识产品的任何类型的策略，包括但不限于决策支持工具、临床实践指南、政策简报或决策工具、单页说明或健康干预措施；比较，任何比较都将被考虑在内；结果，第 1 阶段和第 2 阶段——任何与实施策略相关的结果，包括但不限于对知识产品使用的遵守/一致性的措施、其可接受性、采用、适当性、可行性、适应性、实施成本、渗透/覆盖范围和可持续性；第 3 阶段——任何与患者（心理社会、健康行为和临床结果）或医疗保健专业人员（行为和绩效结果）相关的其他结果；设置，必须涵盖初级保健。我们将从成立之日起在 MEDLINE（Ovid）、EMBASE、Web of Science、PsycINFO、CINAHL 和 Cochrane 图书馆中进行搜索。对于每个阶段，两名审查员将独立进行研究选择、数据提取和评估其方法学质量。我们将分析提取的数据，并进行叙述性综合分析和可能的荟萃分析。
我们的结果不仅可以为综述的方法学提供信息，还可以为知识产品实施策略的在线平台的开发提供信息。该平台对实施科学的利益相关者可能有用。
在 Open Science Framework 上注册的协议，https://osf.io/eb8w2/。
