Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2012 Mar 27:7:25.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-25.

FIRE (Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence): a study protocol

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

FIRE (Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence): a study protocol

Kate Seers et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Research evidence underpins best practice, but is not always used in healthcare. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework suggests that the nature of evidence, the context in which it is used, and whether those trying to use evidence are helped (or facilitated) affect the use of evidence. Urinary incontinence has a major effect on quality of life of older people, has a high prevalence, and is a key priority within European health and social care policy. Improving continence care has the potential to improve the quality of life for older people and reduce the costs associated with providing incontinence aids.

Objectives: This study aims to advance understanding about the contribution facilitation can make to implementing research findings into practice via: extending current knowledge of facilitation as a process for translating research evidence into practice; evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of two different models of facilitation in promoting the uptake of research evidence on continence management; assessing the impact of contextual factors on the processes and outcomes of implementation; and implementing a pro-active knowledge transfer and dissemination strategy to diffuse study findings to a wide policy and practice community.

Setting and sample: Four European countries, each with six long-term nursing care sites (total 24 sites) for people aged 60 years and over with documented urinary incontinence

Methods and design: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial with three arms (standard dissemination and two different programmes of facilitation), with embedded process and economic evaluation. The primary outcome is compliance with the continence recommendations. Secondary outcomes include proportion of residents with incontinence, incidence of incontinence-related dermatitis, urinary tract infections, and quality of life. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, then at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the start of the facilitation interventions. Detailed contextual and process data are collected throughout, using interviews with staff, residents and next of kin, observations, assessment of context using the Alberta Context Tool, and documentary evidence. A realistic evaluation framework is used to develop explanatory theory about what works for whom in what circumstances.

Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11598502.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook RH. How good is the quality of health care in the United States? Milbank Q. 1998;76:517–563. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.00105. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grol R. Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Medical Care. 2001;39:1146–1154. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200111000-00002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rawlins M. In pursuit of quality: the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Lancet. 1999;353:1079–1082. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)02381-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lewis D. National guideline clearing house: extensive resource underused. Manag Care. 2001;10:41–42. - PubMed
    1. Ibbotsen T, Grimshaw J, Grant A. Evaluation of a programme of workshops for the teaching of critical appraisal skills. Medical Education. 1998;32:486–491. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.1998.00256.x. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data