Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31032067›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2019

Use of the consolidated framework for implementation research to guide dissemination and implementation of new technologies in surgery.

Anne C Lambert-Kerzner, Davis M Aasen, Douglas M Overbey, Laura J Damschroder, William G Henderson, Karl E Hammermeister, Michael R Bronsert, Robert A Meguid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Anne C Lambert-KerznerSurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Davis M AasenSurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Douglas M OverbeySurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Laura J DamschroderVA Center for Clinical Management, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
William G HendersonSurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Karl E HammermeisterSurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Michael R BronsertSurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Robert A MeguidSurgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.

Funding

AHRQ HHS R21 HS024124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImproving surgical outcomes is important to patients, providers, and healthcare systems. Understanding best methods to ensure evidence based practices are successfully implemented and sustained in clinical practices leads to improved care. Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science facilitates the successful pathway from clinical trials to sustained implementation.

methodsWe describe D&I science, introduce the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR), a D&I framework, and provide an example of how CFIR was utilized to facilitate the translational process from design adaptations to implementation, broad utilization by clinicians, and sustainability of the SUrgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) tool into regular clinical practice. SURPAS creates data-driven individualized risk assessments of common adverse postoperative outcomes to enhance the informed consent process, shared decision making, and consequently improved surgical outcomes. The CFIR provided a structured systematic way to identify constructs influencing the D&I of SURPAS, including adaptations for the process and tool.

resultsWe identified three domains, each with specific constructs, that participants believed would strongly influence effectiveness of SURPAS implementation efforts: the importance of patients' perspectives (outer setting); the quality of SURPAS (intervention characteristic); and integration of SURPAS into the electronic health record (inner setting). Additionally, providers' positive attitudes toward and support of SURPAS (characteristics of individuals); and the ease of integration of SURPAS into the workflow (process), were also identified. Tension emerged between patients' preference of the provision of risk information and providers' concern about additional clinic time required for formal risk discussion with low-risk patients.

conclusionsSystematically identifying constructs from the beginning of the design through the implementation process can guide design of a multi-component strategy for future large-scale implementation by assessing the relative impact of factors on implementation using the CFIR framework. In the example studied, this allows key stakeholders to ensure success of D&I of SURPAS at multiple levels and times, continuously optimizing the process.

Indexed as

consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR)Dissemination and implementation (D&I)surgery

Identifiers

PMID31032067
PMCPMC6465432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.