BackgroundIt is widely acknowledged that health policy and management decisions rarely reflect research evidence. Therefore, it is important to determine how to improve evidence-informed decision-making. The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of research implementation strategies for promoting evidence-informed policy and management decisions in healthcare. The secondary aim of the review was to describe factors perceived to be associated with effective strategies and the inter-relationship between these factors.MethodsAn electronic search was developed to identify studies published between January 01, 2000, and February 02, 2016. This was supplemented by checking the reference list of included articles, systematic reviews, and hand-searching publication lists from prominent authors. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data.ResultsAfter duplicate removal, the search strategy identified 3830 titles. Following title and abstract screening, 96 full-text articles were reviewed, of which 19 studies (21 articles) met all inclusion criteria. Three studies were included in the narrative synthesis, finding policy briefs including expert opinion might affect intended actions, and intentions persisting to actions for public health policy in developing nations. Workshops, ongoing technical assistance, and distribution of instructional digital materials may improve knowledge and skills around evidence-informed decision-making in US public health departments. Tailored, targeted messages were more effective in increasing public health policies and programs in Canadian public health departments compared to messages and a knowledge broker. Sixteen studies (18 articles) were included in the thematic synthesis, leading to a conceptualisation of inter-relating factors perceived to be associated with effective research implementation strategies. A unidirectional, hierarchal flow was described from (1) establishing an imperative for practice change, (2) building trust between implementation stakeholders and (3) developing a shared vision, to (4) actioning change mechanisms. This was underpinned by the (5) employment of effective communication strategies and (6) provision of resources to support change.ConclusionsEvidence is developing to support the use of research implementation strategies for promoting evidence-informed policy and management decisions in healthcare. The design of future implementation strategies should be based on the inter-relating factors perceived to be associated with effective strategies.Trial registrationThis systematic review was registered with Prospero (record number: 42016032947).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-017-0662-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a dominant and highly penetrant monogenic disorder present from birth that markedly elevates plasma low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol concentration and, if untreated, leads to premature atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease (CAD). There are approximately 100,000 people with FH in Australia. However, an overwhelming majority of those affected remain undetected and inadequately treated, consistent with FH being a leading challenge for public health genomics. To further address the unmet need, we provide an updated guidance, presented as a series of systematically collated recommendations, on the care of patients and families with FH. These recommendations have been informed by an exponential growth in published works and new evidence over the last 5 years and are compatible with a contemporary global call to action on FH. Recommendations are given on the detection, diagnosis, assessment and management of FH in adults and children. Recommendations are also made on genetic testing and risk notification of biological relatives who should undergo cascade testing for FH. Guidance on management is based on the concepts of risk re-stratification, adherence to heart healthy lifestyles, treatment of non-cholesterol risk factors, and safe and appropriate use of LDL-cholesterol lowering therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors and lipoprotein apheresis. Broad recommendations are also provided for the organisation and development of health care services. Recommendations on best practice need to be underpinned by good clinical judgment and shared decision making with patients and families. Models of care for FH need to be adapted to local and regional health care needs and available resources. A comprehensive and realistic implementation strategy, informed by further research, including assessments of cost-benefit, will be required to ensure that this new guidance benefits all Australian families with or at risk of FH.

No abstract

BackgroundDisinvestment (removal, reduction, or reallocation) of routinely provided health services can be difficult when there is little published evidence examining whether the services are effective or not. Evidence is required to understand if removing these services produces outcomes that are inferior to keeping such services in place. However, organisational imperatives, such as budget cuts, may force healthcare providers to disinvest from these services before the required evidence becomes available. There are presently no experimental studies examining the effectiveness of allied health services (e.g., physical therapy, occupational therapy, and social work) provided on weekends across acute medical and surgical hospital wards, despite these services being routinely provided internationally. The aim of this study was to understand the impact of removing weekend allied health services from acute medical and surgical wards using a disinvestment-specific non-inferiority research design.Methods and findingsWe conducted 2 stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trials between 1 February 2014 and 30 April 2015 among patients on 12 acute medical or surgical hospital wards spread across 2 hospitals. The hospitals involved were 2 metropolitan teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Data from n = 14,834 patients were collected for inclusion in Trial 1, and n = 12,674 in Trial 2. Trial 1 was a disinvestment-specific non-inferiority stepped-wedge trial where the ‘current’ weekend allied health service was incrementally removed from participating wards each calendar month, in a random order, while Trial 2 used a conventional non-inferiority stepped-wedge design, where a ‘newly developed’ service was incrementally reinstated on the same wards as in Trial 1. Primary outcome measures were patient length of stay (proportion staying longer than expected and mean length of stay), the proportion of patients experiencing any adverse event, and the proportion with an unplanned readmission within 28 days of discharge. The ‘no weekend allied health service’ condition was considered to be not inferior if the 95% CIs of the differences between this condition and the condition with weekend allied health service delivery were below a 2% increase in the proportion of patients who stayed in hospital longer than expected, a 2% increase in the proportion who had an unplanned readmission within 28 days, a 2% increase in the proportion who had any adverse event, and a 1-day increase in the mean length of stay. The current weekend allied health service included physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, dietetics, social work, and allied health assistant services in line with usual care at the participating sites. The newly developed weekend allied health service allowed managers at each site to reprioritise tasks being performed and the balance of hours provided by each professional group and on which days they were provided. Analyses conducted on an intention-to-treat basis demonstrated that there was no estimated ef...