PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice

Abstract

BackgroundThe Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services, or PARIHS framework, was first published in 1998. Since this time, work has been ongoing to further develop, refine and test it. Widely used as an organising or conceptual framework to help both explain and predict why the implementation of evidence into practice is or is not successful, PARIHS was one of the first frameworks to make explicit the multi-dimensional and complex nature of implementation as well as highlighting the central importance of context. Several critiques of the framework have also pointed out its limitations and suggested areas for improvement.DiscussionBuilding on the published critiques and a number of empirical studies, this paper introduces a revised version of the framework, called the integrated or i-PARIHS framework. The theoretical antecedents of the framework are described as well as outlining the revised and new elements, notably, the revision of how evidence is described; how the individual and teams are incorporated; and how context is further delineated. We describe how the framework can be operationalised and draw on case study data to demonstrate the preliminary testing of the face and content validity of the revised framework.SummaryThis paper is presented for deliberation and discussion within the implementation science community. Responding to a series of critiques and helpful feedback on the utility of the original PARIHS framework, we seek feedback on the proposed improvements to the framework. We believe that the i-PARIHS framework creates a more integrated approach to understand the theoretical complexity from which implementation science draws its propositions and working hypotheses; that the new framework is more coherent and comprehensive and at the same time maintains it intuitive appeal; and that the models of facilitation described enable its more effective operationalisation.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0398-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Leadership perspective on the implementation of guidelines on healthcare-associated infections

“…The revised framework iPARIHS25 was used as a lens through which HCAI guideline implementation from leaders’ perspective could be explored. The iPARIHS framework encompasses the key constructs of innovation (the guidelines), recipients (eg, health service leaders, managers, staff and patient, families), context (eg, health services) and facilitation (eg, engagement strategies).…”

“…Innovation is a central construct within the iPARIHS framework and refers to how “the characteristics of knowledge affect its migration and uptake in different settings” 25. Harvey and Kitson25 propose that people rarely take evidence in the original form (eg, clinical guideline) and apply it within an implementation project.…”

“…Harvey and Kitson25 propose that people rarely take evidence in the original form (eg, clinical guideline) and apply it within an implementation project. More often people incorporate evidence in adaptive ways, aligning evidence with local priorities and practice.…”

Violence Risk Assessment in Forensic Nurses’ Clinical Practice: A Qualitative Interview Study

“…There is still a great gap between best practice and actual clinical care (Belfrage, 1998;Grol & Wensing, 2004;Storey, Watt, & Hart, 2015), in this case the routine use of a RA instrument in daily forensic practice. There has been a great deal of research on violence RA and management in recent years, which has proven to be beneficial for forensic patient care regarding a better transparency of care (e.g.…”

Un guide de présentation des rapports sur la science de l’application des connaissances

“…La science de l'application des connaissances vise à comprendre et à réduire les différences entre les données probantes et la pratique. D'excellents manuels ont été élaborés, dont un manuel de la corporation RAND (2) et plusieurs modèles théoriques ont été proposés et font l'objet d'essais (3,4). Ces derniers ont révélé que de multiples facteurs sont en jeu.…”