FAST: A Framework to Assess Speed of Translation of Health Innovations to Practice and Policy
- PMID: 35669171
- PMCID: PMC9161655
- DOI: 10.1007/s43477-022-00045-4
FAST: A Framework to Assess Speed of Translation of Health Innovations to Practice and Policy
Abstract
The 17-year time span between discovery and application of evidence in practice has become a unifying challenge for implementation science and translational science more broadly. Further, global pandemics and social crises demand timely implementation of rapidly accruing evidence to reduce morbidity and mortality. Yet speed remains an understudied metric in implementation science. Prevailing evaluations of implementation lack a temporal aspect, and current approaches have not yielded rapid implementation. In this paper, we address speed as an important conceptual and methodological gap in implementation science. We aim to untangle the complexities of studying implementation speed, offer a framework to assess speed of translation (FAST), and provide guidance to measure speed in evaluating implementation. To facilitate specification and reporting on metrics of speed, we encourage consideration of stakeholder perspectives (e.g., comparison of varying priorities), referents (e.g., speed in attaining outcomes, transitioning between implementation phases), and observation windows (e.g., time from intervention development to first patient treated) in its measurement. The FAST framework identifies factors that may influence speed of implementation and potential effects of implementation speed. We propose a research agenda to advance understanding of the pace of implementation, including identifying accelerators and inhibitors to speed.
Keywords: Implementation science; Metrics; Rapid cycle research; Speed; Translational science.
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interestsThe authors declare no other competing interests. Views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and are not official positions of the National Cancer Institute.
Figures
References
-
- Balas EA, Boren SA. Managing clinical knowledge for health care improvement. In: Bemmel J, McCray A, editors. Yearbook of medical informatics 2000: Patient-centered systems. Schattauer; 2000. - PubMed
-
- Bower J. Resource allocation theory. In: Augier M, Teece DJ, editors. The Palgrave Encyclopedia of strategic management. Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. pp. 1445–1448.
-
- Brookman-Frazee L, Stadnick N, Roesch S, Regan J, Barnett M, Bando L, Innes-Gomberg D, Lau A. Measuring sustainment of multiple practices fiscally mandated in children’s mental health services. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2016;43(6):1009–1022. doi: 10.1007/s10488-016-0731-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Brown-Johnson C, Safaeinili N, Zionts D, Holdsworth LM, Shaw JG, Asch SM, Mahoney M, Winget M. The Stanford lightning report method: A comparison of rapid qualitative synthesis results across four implementation evaluations. Learning Health Systems. 2020;4(2):e10210. doi: 10.1002/lrh2.10210. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous