JCPSLP Vol 16 Issue 1 2014 - page 29

JCPSLP
Volume 16, Number 1 2014
27
Table 2. Critically appraised article
Article purpose
To evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of two KTE interventions to promote the uptake of research evidence (clinical
guideline adherence) in speech pathology management of post stroke dysphagia.
Article citation
Pennington et al. (2005). Promoting research use in speech and language therapy: A cluster randomized controlled trial to
compare the clinical effectiveness and costs of two training strategies. Clinical Rehabilitation, 19, 387–397.
Level of evidence Level II, pragmatic cluster RCT study design
Participants
Two speech pathologists from 17 departments (n = 34) participated in training with the aim of cascading the training
through to their local departments.
Intervention
Education–professional education meetings (EPOC). Intervention A consisted of training on the principles of EBP and
(including EPOC
critical appraisal of published guidelines. Intervention B contained the same training plus information on change
definition)
management theory (Diffusion of innovations).
Outcome measures Clinician behaviour change and service level outcomes (cost comparison of Intervention A and B). Guideline adherence
measured prior to and six months after intervention using retrospective audit tool across 708 clients (Intervention A) and
762 clients (Intervention B).
Results
Mean adherence prior to the KTE intervention was 73%. There was great variation in pre training adherence and
improvement among departments. Neither approach significantly improved adherence. SLPs who received the change
management theory engaged in significantly more research activities initially, but this was not maintained at 6 months. The
range of costs between intervention A and B were similar.
Limitations
No client outcome measures utilised and there was no blinding of the assessor. Although implementation barriers such as
the generic nature of the education and whether or not the SLPs were opinion leaders were discussed by the authors, the
study did not assess and target intervention to those barriers (tailored intervention). It also did not explicitly ask departments
to choose opinion leaders who may have been able to encourage change. Mean initial adherence was already relatively
high overall at 73% meaning that for some departments there was not a lot of room for change. Sustained change not
addressed explicitly in the intervention.
Summary
While there were no significant differences in the overall outcomes of the study for each KTE intervention, targeting many of
the study’s limitations may have enhanced the outcome considerably and may provide important lessons for future
interventions.
Table 3. Summary of a variety of intervention types to influence the uptake of research evidence into practice
based on the EPOC taxonomy
Intervention types
Details. Note “providers” could be considered rehabilitation teams or clinicians.
for professionals
Dissemination of
Printed or electronic publications that contain recommendations for clinical care and evidence to improve practices,
education materials
including clinical practice guidelines – may be unsolicited through mass mailing or delivered personally.
Educational meetings Conferences, workshops, lectures – may be largely dydactic “sit and listen” or more interactive events.
Local consensus
Inclusion of participating providers in discussion to ensure that they agree that the chosen clinical problem was important
processes
and the approach to managing the problem was appropriate (e.g., stroke working parties).
Education outreach
Use of a trained person (may be an academic) who meets with providers in their practice settings to give information with
visits
the intent of changing the provider’s practice. May include feedback on the performance of the provider(s).
Local opinion leaders Individuals who are able to influence the attitudes or behaviours of others. The researchers must have explicitly stated
that local colleagues identified the leaders.
Client-mediated
Intervention aimed at changing professionals’ behaviour through interactions with, or information provided by, or to,
interventions for
clients. Note: This is different to direct education of clients to change their own behaviours.
professionals
Audit and feedback
Any summary of clinical performance of health care over a specified period of time. The summary may also have included
recommendations for clinical action. The information may have been obtained from medical records, computerised
databases, or observations from clients. Clinicians may be familiar with audit and feedback from quality improvement
initiatives.
Reminders
Information provided verbally, on paper or a computer screen/device that prompts a professional to recall information.
Tailored interventions Use of interviewing, group discussion (“focus groups”), or a survey of targeted providers to identify barriers to change and
subsequent design of an intervention that addresses identified barriers.
Mass media
Use of communication that reached great numbers of people including television, radio, newspapers, posters, leaflets,
and booklets, alone or in conjunction with other interventions.
Multifaceted
Any intervention that includes two or more components above.
interventions
Source:
from
1...,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28 30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,...52
Powered by FlippingBook