Objectives: To evaluate the Promoting Action on Clinical Effectiveness (PACE) programme, which sought to implement clinically effective practice in 16 local sites. Methods: 182 semi-structured interviews, usually by telephone, with project team members, clinicians, and senior managers and representatives from the Department of Health and the King's Fund. Results: The most influential factors were strong evidence, supportive opinion leaders and integration within a committed organization; without these factors, projects had little chance of success. Other factors (context analysis, professional involvement and good project management) emerged as important, supporting processes; their presence might be an additional help, but on their own they would not be enough to initiate change. A serious problem with any of them could have a strong adverse impact. Conclusions: Although there is no simple formula for the factors that ensure successful implementation of research-based improvements to clinical practice, certain principles do seem to help. Time and resource need to be devoted to a period of local negotiation and adaptation of good research evidence based on a careful understanding of the local context, in which opinion leader influence is an important component of a well managed and preferably well integrated process of change.
[1]
S. Dopson,et al.
Changing clinical practice: views about the management of adult asthma.
,
1999,
Quality in health care : QHC.
[2]
E. Ferlie,et al.
Evidence into Practice? An exploratory analysis of the interpretation of evidence
,
1999
.
[3]
G. Huby,et al.
From trial data to practical knowledge: qualitative study of how general practitioners have accessed and used evidence about statin drugs in their management of hypercholesterolaemia
,
1998,
BMJ.
[4]
S. Dopson,et al.
Influences on clinical practice: the case of glue ear.
,
1999,
Quality in health care : QHC.