A pre-post evaluation of a knowledge translation capacity-building intervention

Sally Eames, Sally Bennett, Mary Whitehead, Jennifer Fleming, Shanling Olivia Low, Sharon Mickan, Elizabeth Caldwell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background/aim: Knowledge translation (KT) aims to reduce research-practice gaps. Few studies have investigated methods to build clinicians’ capacity for KT. To: (i) evaluate the impact of a multifaceted KT capacity-building intervention; (ii) understand barriers and enablers to clinicians’ use of KT; and (iii) identify useful strategies. Methods: A pre-post study to develop KT capacity amongst occupational therapy clinicians (n = 46) in a large metropolitan hospital. A customised questionaire (baseline and 18 months) identified KT-related behaviours and barriers and enablers guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were completed on matched data (n = 20). At follow-up additional items explored perceptions of change and usefulness of strategies. Results: At follow-up, participants had read more clinical guidelines (10 vs. 17) and more participants reported using strategies to increase the use of recommended clinical practices (P = 0.006). The main barriers at baseline were from the TDF domains of ‘attention, memory and decision processes’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘environmental context and resources’, while main enablers were from ‘social/professional role and identity’, ‘reinforcement’, ‘social influence’ and ‘beliefs about consequences’ domains. At follow-up, significant improvements were seen in ‘knowledge’ (p < 0.001), ‘environmental context & resources’ (P < 0.001), ‘skills’ (P = 0.008) ‘beliefs about consequences’ (P = 0.011), ‘beliefs about capabilities’ (P = 0.018), and ‘memory, attention & decision processes’ (P = 0.048) and participants agreed that KT had become part of the departments’ culture. Strategies perceived most useful included working as a team, having a dedicated staff member, mentoring meetings, department leader support, learning about KT over time, and training sessions. Conclusions: The KT capacity-building intervention changed one clinician-reported behaviour and perceived impact of barriers across six domains. Clinicians reported perceived improvement in understanding of – and confidence in – KT, and changes in the culture to one of engaging with KT as part of clinical practice. Further research into KT capacity building is needed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)479-493
Number of pages15
JournalAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal
Volume65
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Capacity Building
Translational Medical Research
Professional Role
Social Identification
Occupational Therapy
Urban Hospitals
Nonparametric Statistics
Research

Cite this

Eames, Sally ; Bennett, Sally ; Whitehead, Mary ; Fleming, Jennifer ; Low, Shanling Olivia ; Mickan, Sharon ; Caldwell, Elizabeth. / A pre-post evaluation of a knowledge translation capacity-building intervention. In: Australian Occupational Therapy Journal. 2018 ; Vol. 65, No. 6. pp. 479-493.
@article{b947f76a0ec0473083a901cf1c9d708d,
title = "A pre-post evaluation of a knowledge translation capacity-building intervention",
abstract = "Background/aim: Knowledge translation (KT) aims to reduce research-practice gaps. Few studies have investigated methods to build clinicians’ capacity for KT. To: (i) evaluate the impact of a multifaceted KT capacity-building intervention; (ii) understand barriers and enablers to clinicians’ use of KT; and (iii) identify useful strategies. Methods: A pre-post study to develop KT capacity amongst occupational therapy clinicians (n = 46) in a large metropolitan hospital. A customised questionaire (baseline and 18 months) identified KT-related behaviours and barriers and enablers guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were completed on matched data (n = 20). At follow-up additional items explored perceptions of change and usefulness of strategies. Results: At follow-up, participants had read more clinical guidelines (10 vs. 17) and more participants reported using strategies to increase the use of recommended clinical practices (P = 0.006). The main barriers at baseline were from the TDF domains of ‘attention, memory and decision processes’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘environmental context and resources’, while main enablers were from ‘social/professional role and identity’, ‘reinforcement’, ‘social influence’ and ‘beliefs about consequences’ domains. At follow-up, significant improvements were seen in ‘knowledge’ (p < 0.001), ‘environmental context & resources’ (P < 0.001), ‘skills’ (P = 0.008) ‘beliefs about consequences’ (P = 0.011), ‘beliefs about capabilities’ (P = 0.018), and ‘memory, attention & decision processes’ (P = 0.048) and participants agreed that KT had become part of the departments’ culture. Strategies perceived most useful included working as a team, having a dedicated staff member, mentoring meetings, department leader support, learning about KT over time, and training sessions. Conclusions: The KT capacity-building intervention changed one clinician-reported behaviour and perceived impact of barriers across six domains. Clinicians reported perceived improvement in understanding of – and confidence in – KT, and changes in the culture to one of engaging with KT as part of clinical practice. Further research into KT capacity building is needed.",
author = "Sally Eames and Sally Bennett and Mary Whitehead and Jennifer Fleming and Low, {Shanling Olivia} and Sharon Mickan and Elizabeth Caldwell",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1440-1630.12483",
language = "English",
volume = "65",
pages = "479--493",
journal = "Australian Occupational Therapy Journal",
issn = "0045-0766",
publisher = "Wiley Online Library",
number = "6",

}

A pre-post evaluation of a knowledge translation capacity-building intervention. / Eames, Sally; Bennett, Sally; Whitehead, Mary; Fleming, Jennifer; Low, Shanling Olivia; Mickan, Sharon; Caldwell, Elizabeth.

In: Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, Vol. 65, No. 6, 01.12.2018, p. 479-493.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A pre-post evaluation of a knowledge translation capacity-building intervention

AU - Eames, Sally

AU - Bennett, Sally

AU - Whitehead, Mary

AU - Fleming, Jennifer

AU - Low, Shanling Olivia

AU - Mickan, Sharon

AU - Caldwell, Elizabeth

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - Background/aim: Knowledge translation (KT) aims to reduce research-practice gaps. Few studies have investigated methods to build clinicians’ capacity for KT. To: (i) evaluate the impact of a multifaceted KT capacity-building intervention; (ii) understand barriers and enablers to clinicians’ use of KT; and (iii) identify useful strategies. Methods: A pre-post study to develop KT capacity amongst occupational therapy clinicians (n = 46) in a large metropolitan hospital. A customised questionaire (baseline and 18 months) identified KT-related behaviours and barriers and enablers guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were completed on matched data (n = 20). At follow-up additional items explored perceptions of change and usefulness of strategies. Results: At follow-up, participants had read more clinical guidelines (10 vs. 17) and more participants reported using strategies to increase the use of recommended clinical practices (P = 0.006). The main barriers at baseline were from the TDF domains of ‘attention, memory and decision processes’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘environmental context and resources’, while main enablers were from ‘social/professional role and identity’, ‘reinforcement’, ‘social influence’ and ‘beliefs about consequences’ domains. At follow-up, significant improvements were seen in ‘knowledge’ (p < 0.001), ‘environmental context & resources’ (P < 0.001), ‘skills’ (P = 0.008) ‘beliefs about consequences’ (P = 0.011), ‘beliefs about capabilities’ (P = 0.018), and ‘memory, attention & decision processes’ (P = 0.048) and participants agreed that KT had become part of the departments’ culture. Strategies perceived most useful included working as a team, having a dedicated staff member, mentoring meetings, department leader support, learning about KT over time, and training sessions. Conclusions: The KT capacity-building intervention changed one clinician-reported behaviour and perceived impact of barriers across six domains. Clinicians reported perceived improvement in understanding of – and confidence in – KT, and changes in the culture to one of engaging with KT as part of clinical practice. Further research into KT capacity building is needed.

AB - Background/aim: Knowledge translation (KT) aims to reduce research-practice gaps. Few studies have investigated methods to build clinicians’ capacity for KT. To: (i) evaluate the impact of a multifaceted KT capacity-building intervention; (ii) understand barriers and enablers to clinicians’ use of KT; and (iii) identify useful strategies. Methods: A pre-post study to develop KT capacity amongst occupational therapy clinicians (n = 46) in a large metropolitan hospital. A customised questionaire (baseline and 18 months) identified KT-related behaviours and barriers and enablers guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were completed on matched data (n = 20). At follow-up additional items explored perceptions of change and usefulness of strategies. Results: At follow-up, participants had read more clinical guidelines (10 vs. 17) and more participants reported using strategies to increase the use of recommended clinical practices (P = 0.006). The main barriers at baseline were from the TDF domains of ‘attention, memory and decision processes’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘environmental context and resources’, while main enablers were from ‘social/professional role and identity’, ‘reinforcement’, ‘social influence’ and ‘beliefs about consequences’ domains. At follow-up, significant improvements were seen in ‘knowledge’ (p < 0.001), ‘environmental context & resources’ (P < 0.001), ‘skills’ (P = 0.008) ‘beliefs about consequences’ (P = 0.011), ‘beliefs about capabilities’ (P = 0.018), and ‘memory, attention & decision processes’ (P = 0.048) and participants agreed that KT had become part of the departments’ culture. Strategies perceived most useful included working as a team, having a dedicated staff member, mentoring meetings, department leader support, learning about KT over time, and training sessions. Conclusions: The KT capacity-building intervention changed one clinician-reported behaviour and perceived impact of barriers across six domains. Clinicians reported perceived improvement in understanding of – and confidence in – KT, and changes in the culture to one of engaging with KT as part of clinical practice. Further research into KT capacity building is needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047818429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1440-1630.12483

DO - 10.1111/1440-1630.12483

M3 - Article

VL - 65

SP - 479

EP - 493

JO - Australian Occupational Therapy Journal

JF - Australian Occupational Therapy Journal

SN - 0045-0766

IS - 6

ER -