Supporting Policy In health with Research: an Intervention Trial (SPIRIT)—protocol for a stepped wedge trial

Introduction Governments in different countries have committed to better use of evidence from research in policy. Although many programmes are directed at assisting agencies to better use research, there have been few tests of the effectiveness of such programmes. This paper describes the protocol for SPIRIT (Supporting Policy In health with Research: an Intervention Trial), a trial designed to test the effectiveness of a multifaceted programme to build organisational capacity for the use of research evidence in policy and programme development. The primary aim is to determine whether SPIRIT results in an increase in the extent to which research and research expertise is sought, appraised, generated and used in the development of specific policy products produced by health policy agencies. Methods and analysis A stepped wedge cluster randomised trial involving six health policy agencies located in Sydney, Australia. Policy agencies are the unit of randomisation and intervention. Agencies were randomly allocated to one of three start dates (steps) to receive the 1-year intervention programme, underpinned by an action framework. The SPIRIT intervention is tailored to suit the interests and needs of each agency and includes audit, feedback and goal setting; a leadership programme; staff training; the opportunity to test systems to assist in the use of research in policies; and exchange with researchers. Outcome measures will be collected at each agency every 6 months for 30 months (starting at the beginning of step 1). Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was granted by the University of Western Sydney Human Research and Ethics Committee HREC Approval H8855. The findings of this study will be disseminated broadly through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences and used to inform future strategies.

[1]  G. Moore,et al.  Evidence Check: knowledge brokering to commission research reviews for policy , 2011 .

[2]  Susan Michie,et al.  Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions , 2015 .

[3]  C. Charles,et al.  "Interaction" and research utilisation in health policies and programs: does it work? , 2005, Health policy.

[4]  J. Hughes,et al.  Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. , 2007, Contemporary clinical trials.

[5]  G. Sher,et al.  Out of Control* , 2006, Ethics.

[6]  S. Nutley,et al.  Developing organizational learning in the NHS , 2001, Medical education.

[7]  D. Sackett,et al.  Cochrane Collaboration , 1994, BMJ.

[8]  R. Lilford,et al.  Bmc Medical Research Methodology Open Access the Stepped Wedge Trial Design: a Systematic Review , 2022 .

[9]  Charles B. Fleming,et al.  Opening the Black Box: Using Process Evaluation Measures to Assess Implementation and Theory Building , 1999, American journal of community psychology.

[10]  T. Turner,et al.  Developing definitions for a knowledge exchange intervention in health policy and program agencies: reflections on process and value , 2015 .

[11]  Scott Greer,et al.  Medical autonomy: Peeling the onion , 2008, Journal of health services research & policy.

[12]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Looking inside the black box: a theory-based process evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial of printed educational materials (the Ontario printed educational message, OPEM) to improve referral and prescribing practices in primary care in Ontario, Canada , 2007, Implementation science : IS.

[13]  P. Senge The leader's new work: Building learning organizations. , 1998 .

[14]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  J. Hartley,et al.  Organizational Learning and Knowledge in Public Service Organizations: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2009 .

[16]  D. Alexander,et al.  What Works : evidence centres for social policy , 2013 .

[17]  Rona Campbell,et al.  Meeting the challenges of implementing process evaluation within randomized controlled trials: the example of ASSIST (A Stop Smoking in Schools Trial). , 2006, Health education research.

[18]  S. Redman,et al.  What works to increase the use of research in population health policy and programmes: a review , 2011 .

[19]  J. Denis,et al.  Creating Receptor Capacity for Research in the Health System: The Executive Training for Research Application (Extra) Program in Canada , 2008, Journal of health services research & policy.

[20]  M. Collins,et al.  Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning , 1988 .

[21]  B. Reeves,et al.  Critical appraisal skills training for health care professionals: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN46272378] , 2004, BMC medical education.

[22]  Shawna L. Mercer,et al.  A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[23]  C. Scott,et al.  World Report on Knowledge for Better Health: Strengthening Health Systems , 2006 .

[24]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Complex interventions: how “out of control” can a randomised controlled trial be? , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  Boyd Swinburn,et al.  An exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of knowledge translation strategies to support evidence-informed decision-making in local governments (The KT4LG study) , 2011, BMC public health.

[26]  Adetokunbo O. Lucas,et al.  World Report on Knowledge for Better Health: strengthening health systems , 2005 .

[27]  A. Bandura Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory , 1998 .

[28]  A. Bandura Principles of behavior modification , 1969 .

[29]  M. Kreuter,et al.  Integrating Adult Learning Principles Into Training for Public Health Practice , 2009, Health promotion practice.

[30]  D. Ciliska,et al.  FACTORS OF THE INNOVATION, ORGANIZATION, ENVIRONMENT, AND INDIVIDUAL THAT PREDICT THE INFLUENCE FIVE SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS HAD ON PUBLIC HEALTH DECISIONS , 2001, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[31]  G. Robert,et al.  Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. , 2004, The Milbank quarterly.

[32]  Kevin D Frick,et al.  Microcosting Quantity Data Collection Methods , 2009, Medical care.