TY - JOUR
T1 - Effective strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in primary care
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Ben Charif, Ali
AU - Zomahoun, Hervé Tchala Vignon
AU - LeBlanc, Annie
AU - Langlois, Léa
AU - Wolfenden, Luke
AU - Yoong, Sze Lin
AU - Williams, Christopher M.
AU - Lépine, Roxanne
AU - Légaré, France
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was funded by the “Health and Social Services Systems, Knowledge Translation and Implementation” component of the Quebec SPOR-SUPPORT Unit (#SU1-139759), one of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) Support for People and Patient-Oriented Research and Trials (SUPPORT) unit. However, only the authors are responsible for the information provided and the views expressed in this article. FL holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation. AL holds a Fonds de recherche en santé du Québec - Santé (FRQ-S) Junior 2 Scientist Award.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Author(s).
PY - 2017/11/22
Y1 - 2017/11/22
N2 - Background: While an extensive array of existing evidence-based practices (EBPs) have the potential to improve patient outcomes, little is known about how to implement EBPs on a larger scale. Therefore, we sought to identify effective strategies for scaling up EBPs in primary care. Methods: We conducted a systematic review with the following inclusion criteria: (i) study design: randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, before-and-after (with/without control), and interrupted time series; (ii) participants: primary care-related units (e.g., clinical sites, patients); (iii) intervention: any strategy used to scale up an EBP; (iv) comparator: no restrictions; and (v) outcomes: no restrictions. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to August 2016 and consulted clinical trial registries and gray literature. Two reviewers independently selected eligible studies, then extracted and analyzed data following theCochrane methodology. We extracted components of scaling-up strategies and classified them into five categories: infrastructure, policy/regulation, financial, human resources-related, and patient involvement. We extracted scaling-up process outcomes, such as coverage, and provider/patient outcomes. We validated data extraction with study authors. Results: We included 14 studies. They were published since 2003 and primarily conducted in low-/middle-income countries (n=11). Most were funded by governmental organizations (n=8). The clinical area most represented was infectious diseases (HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria, n=8), followed by newborn/child care (n=4), depression (n=1), and preventing seniors' falls (n=1). Study designs were mostly before-and-after (without control, n=8). The most frequently targeted unit of scaling up was the clinical site (n=11). The component of a scaling-up strategy most frequently mentioned was human resource-related (n=12). All studies reported patient/provider outcomes. Three studies reported scaling-up coverage, but no study quantitatively reported achieving a coverage of 80% in combination with a favorable impact. Conclusions: We found few studies assessing strategies for scaling up EBPs in primary care settings. It is uncertain whether any strategies were effective as most studies focused more on patient/provider outcomes and less on scaling-up process outcomes. Minimal consensus on the metrics of scaling up are needed for assessing the scaling up of EBPs in primary care. Trial registration: This review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041461.
AB - Background: While an extensive array of existing evidence-based practices (EBPs) have the potential to improve patient outcomes, little is known about how to implement EBPs on a larger scale. Therefore, we sought to identify effective strategies for scaling up EBPs in primary care. Methods: We conducted a systematic review with the following inclusion criteria: (i) study design: randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, before-and-after (with/without control), and interrupted time series; (ii) participants: primary care-related units (e.g., clinical sites, patients); (iii) intervention: any strategy used to scale up an EBP; (iv) comparator: no restrictions; and (v) outcomes: no restrictions. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to August 2016 and consulted clinical trial registries and gray literature. Two reviewers independently selected eligible studies, then extracted and analyzed data following theCochrane methodology. We extracted components of scaling-up strategies and classified them into five categories: infrastructure, policy/regulation, financial, human resources-related, and patient involvement. We extracted scaling-up process outcomes, such as coverage, and provider/patient outcomes. We validated data extraction with study authors. Results: We included 14 studies. They were published since 2003 and primarily conducted in low-/middle-income countries (n=11). Most were funded by governmental organizations (n=8). The clinical area most represented was infectious diseases (HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria, n=8), followed by newborn/child care (n=4), depression (n=1), and preventing seniors' falls (n=1). Study designs were mostly before-and-after (without control, n=8). The most frequently targeted unit of scaling up was the clinical site (n=11). The component of a scaling-up strategy most frequently mentioned was human resource-related (n=12). All studies reported patient/provider outcomes. Three studies reported scaling-up coverage, but no study quantitatively reported achieving a coverage of 80% in combination with a favorable impact. Conclusions: We found few studies assessing strategies for scaling up EBPs in primary care settings. It is uncertain whether any strategies were effective as most studies focused more on patient/provider outcomes and less on scaling-up process outcomes. Minimal consensus on the metrics of scaling up are needed for assessing the scaling up of EBPs in primary care. Trial registration: This review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041461.
KW - Evidence-based practices
KW - Implementation
KW - Knowledge translation
KW - Primary care
KW - Scaling up
KW - Spread
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85034784376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85034784376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s13012-017-0672-y
DO - 10.1186/s13012-017-0672-y
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85034784376
SN - 1748-5908
VL - 12
JO - Implementation Science
JF - Implementation Science
IS - 1
M1 - 139
ER -