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
. 2019 Oct;57 Suppl 10 Suppl 3(10 Suppl 3):S272-S277.
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001176.

Prioritizing Evidence-based Interventions for Dissemination and Implementation Investments: AHRQ's Model and Experience

Affiliations

Prioritizing Evidence-based Interventions for Dissemination and Implementation Investments: AHRQ's Model and Experience

Jill S Huppert et al. Med Care. 2019 Oct.

Abstract

Background: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is mandated to implement patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) to promote safer, higher quality care. With this goal, we developed a process to identify which evidence-based PCOR interventions merit investment in implementation. We present our process and experience to date.

Materials and methods: AHRQ developed and applied a systematic, transparent, and stakeholder-driven process to identify, evaluate, and prioritize PCOR interventions for broad dissemination and implementation. AHRQ encouraged public nominations, and assessed them against criteria for quality of evidence, potential impact, and feasibility of successful implementation. Nominations with sufficient evidence, impact, and feasibility were considered for funding.

Results: Between June 2016 and June 2018, AHRQ received 35 nominations from researchers, nonprofit corporations, and federal agencies. Topics covered diverse settings, populations, and clinical areas. Twenty-eight unique PCOR interventions met minimum criteria; 16 of those had moderate to high evidence/impact and were assessed for feasibility. Fourteen topics either duplicated other efforts or lacked evidence on implementation feasibility. Two topics were prioritized for funding (cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction and screening/treatment for unhealthy alcohol use).

Conclusions: AHRQ developed replicable criteria, and a transparent and stakeholder-driven framework that attracted a diverse array of nominations. We identified 2 evidence-based practice interventions to improve care with sufficient evidence, impact, and feasibility to justify an AHRQ investment to scale up practice. Other funders, health systems or institutions could use or modify this process to guide prioritization for implementation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

J.L.B. was employed at AHRQ where this work was performed, through October 2018. She has subsequently moved to a position with DC Health (public health department of District of Columbia). The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) Dissemination and Implementation initiative 7-step prioritization framework.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Diagram describing how nominations were winnowed through the assessment phases of the AHRQ patient-centered outcomes research Dissemination and Implementation (D&I) initiative prioritization process. Numbers as of June 2018. AHRQ indicates the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; PCOR, patient-centered outcomes research.

References

    1. Montori VM, Hargraves I, McNellis RJ, et al. The care and learn model: a practice and research model for improving healthcare quality and outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2018;34:154–158. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104:510–520. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Viswanathan M, Patnode CD, Berkman ND, et al. Recommendations for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews of health-care interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:26–34. - PubMed
    1. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:401–406. - PubMed
    1. Maciosek MV, LaFrance AB, Dehmer SP, et al. Updated priorities among effective clinical preventive services. Ann Fam Med. 2017;15:14–22. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms