Dissemination and implementation of comparative effectiveness evidence: key informant interviews with Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions.

AIM To identify ongoing practices and opportunities for improving national comparative effectiveness research (CER) translation through dissemination and implementation (D&I) via NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions. MATERIALS & METHODS Key informant interviews were conducted with 18 CTSA grantees sampled to represent a range of D&I efforts. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS The institutional representatives endorsed fostering CER translation nationally via the CTSA Consortium. However, five themes emerged from the interviews as barriers to CER D&I: lack of institutional awareness, insufficient capacity, lack of established D&I methods, confusion among stakeholders about what CER actually is and limited funding opportunities. Interviewees offered two key recommendations to improve CER translation: development of a centralized clearing house to facilitate the diffusion of CER D&I resources and methods across CTSA institutions; and formalization of the national CTSA network to leverage existing community engagement relationships and resources for the purpose of adapting and disseminating robust CER evidence locally with providers, patients and healthcare systems.

[1]  S. Woolf Society's choice: the tradeoff between efficacy and equity and the lives at stake. , 2004, American journal of preventive medicine.

[2]  James W. Mold,et al.  A health care cooperative extension service: transforming primary care and community health. , 2009, JAMA.

[3]  E. Funkhouser,et al.  Improving care after myocardial infarction using a 2-year internet-delivered intervention: the Department of Veterans Affairs myocardial infarction-plus cluster-randomized trial. , 2011, Archives of internal medicine.

[4]  From appropriate care to evidence-based medicine. , 1998, Pediatric annals.

[5]  Michael A. Yonas,et al.  Aligning the Goals of Community-Engaged Research: Why and How Academic Health Centers Can Successfully Engage With Communities to Improve Health , 2012, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[6]  G. Wilensky Developing a center for comparative effectiveness information. , 2006, Health affairs.

[7]  Jürgen Unützer,et al.  Partnership Research: A Practical Trial Design for Evaluation of a Natural Experiment to Improve Depression Care , 2010, Medical care.

[8]  S. Greenfield,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness Research: A Report From the Institute of Medicine , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[9]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[10]  J. Benner,et al.  An evaluation of recent federal spending on comparative effectiveness research: priorities, gaps, and next steps. , 2010, Health affairs.

[11]  David A. Chambers,et al.  National Institutes of Health approaches to dissemination and implementation science: current and future directions. , 2012, American journal of public health.

[12]  S. Timmermans,et al.  The promises and pitfalls of evidence-based medicine. , 2005, Health affairs.

[13]  P. Pronovost,et al.  Harnessing the Potential of Health Care Collaboratives: Lessons from the Keystone ICU Project , 2008 .

[14]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition , 2003 .

[15]  Paul Meissner,et al.  A New Taxonomy for Stakeholder Engagement in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research , 2012, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[16]  P. Pronovost,et al.  An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  D. Cook,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 2000, JAMA.

[18]  Mildred Z. Solomon,et al.  Moving comparative effectiveness research into practice: implementation science and the role of academic medicine. , 2010, Health affairs.

[19]  M. Drummond,et al.  Principles for planning and conducting comparative effectiveness research. , 2012, Journal of comparative effectiveness research.

[20]  Ross C. Brownson,et al.  From the Schools of Public Health , 2002 .

[21]  C. Clancy,et al.  Charting a path from comparative effectiveness funding to improved patient-centered health care. , 2010, JAMA.

[22]  K Henriksen,et al.  Harnessing the Potential of Health Care Collaboratives: Lessons from the Keystone ICU Project -- Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches (Vol. 2: Culture and Redesign) , 2008 .

[23]  C. Clancy,et al.  Comparative-effectiveness research--implications of the Federal Coordinating Council's report. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  R. Brownson,et al.  Translating scientific discoveries into public health action: how can schools of public health move us forward? , 2006, Public health reports.

[25]  Justin W Timbie,et al.  Five reasons that many comparative effectiveness studies fail to change patient care and clinical practice. , 2012, Health affairs.

[26]  F. Collins Reengineering Translational Science: The Time Is Right , 2011, Science Translational Medicine.

[27]  A. Garber How the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute can best influence real-world health care decision making. , 2011, Health affairs.

[28]  E. Funkhouser,et al.  Characteristics that predict physician participation in a Web‐based CME activity: The MI‐Plus study , 2009, The Journal of continuing education in the health professions.

[29]  B. Yawn,et al.  Translating Comparative Effectiveness Into Practice: The Case of Diabetes Medications , 2010, Medical care.