Exploring clinicians' experiences and perceptions of end-user roles in knowledge development: a qualitative study.
Clinical care pathway
Integrated knowledge translation
Qualitative inquiry
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Sep 2021
06 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
19
04
2021
accepted:
13
08
2021
entrez:
7
9
2021
pubmed:
8
9
2021
medline:
9
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
End-user involvement in developing evidence-based tools for clinical practice may result in increased uptake and improved patient outcomes. Understanding end-user experiences and perceptions about the co-production of knowledge is useful to further the science of integrated knowledge translation (iKT) - a strategy for accelerating the uptake and impact of research. Our study had two main objectives: (1) explore end-user (clinician) experiences of co-producing an evidence-based practice tool; and (2) describe end-user perceptions in knowledge development. We used a qualitative study design. We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians and used a transcendental phenomenological approach to analyze themes/phenomena. In addition, we explored the interrelated themes between the thematic maps of each objective. Four themes emerged from clinicians' experiences in co-producing the practice tool: ease/convenience of participating, need for support and encouragement, understanding the value of participating, and individual skillsets yield meaningful contributions. Stakeholder roles in knowledge tool development and improving dissemination of evidence and knowledge tools were themes that related to clinician perceptions in knowledge development. The review of interrelated thematic maps depicts an intertwined relationship between stakeholders and dissemination. End-users provide invaluable insight and perspective into the development of evidence-based clinical tools. Exploring the experiences and perceptions of end-users may support future research endeavours involving iKT, such as the co-production of clinical resources, potentially improving uptake and patient health outcomes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
End-user involvement in developing evidence-based tools for clinical practice may result in increased uptake and improved patient outcomes. Understanding end-user experiences and perceptions about the co-production of knowledge is useful to further the science of integrated knowledge translation (iKT) - a strategy for accelerating the uptake and impact of research. Our study had two main objectives: (1) explore end-user (clinician) experiences of co-producing an evidence-based practice tool; and (2) describe end-user perceptions in knowledge development.
METHODS
METHODS
We used a qualitative study design. We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians and used a transcendental phenomenological approach to analyze themes/phenomena. In addition, we explored the interrelated themes between the thematic maps of each objective.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Four themes emerged from clinicians' experiences in co-producing the practice tool: ease/convenience of participating, need for support and encouragement, understanding the value of participating, and individual skillsets yield meaningful contributions. Stakeholder roles in knowledge tool development and improving dissemination of evidence and knowledge tools were themes that related to clinician perceptions in knowledge development. The review of interrelated thematic maps depicts an intertwined relationship between stakeholders and dissemination.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
End-users provide invaluable insight and perspective into the development of evidence-based clinical tools. Exploring the experiences and perceptions of end-users may support future research endeavours involving iKT, such as the co-production of clinical resources, potentially improving uptake and patient health outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34488751
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06955-7
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-06955-7
pmc: PMC8420847
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
926Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Nov;14(11):978-83
pubmed: 17967959
PLoS One. 2020 May 5;15(5):e0232076
pubmed: 32369511
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2008 Spring;28(2):67-72
pubmed: 18521874
Implement Sci. 2016 Mar 17;11:38
pubmed: 26988000
BMC Fam Pract. 2008 Jun 27;9:37
pubmed: 18588685
J Comp Eff Res. 2017 Jun;6(4):375-389
pubmed: 28621551
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004 Oct;9 Suppl 2:3-9
pubmed: 15511319
Implement Sci. 2013 Sep 05;8:104
pubmed: 24007259
Psychother Res. 2009 Jul;19(4-5):583-90
pubmed: 20183407
Milbank Q. 2012 Jun;90(2):311-46
pubmed: 22709390
Int J Nurs Stud. 2006 Jul;43(5):637-51
pubmed: 16157338
Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1802-1811
pubmed: 27340178
Eval Program Plann. 2008 May;31(2):160-73
pubmed: 18336906
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jan;94(1 Suppl):S3-8
pubmed: 23141502
Qual Health Res. 2004 May;14(5):726-35
pubmed: 15107174
Health Policy. 2013 Feb;109(2):187-91
pubmed: 23228520
Milbank Q. 2008 Mar;86(1):125-55
pubmed: 18307479
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2020 Dec;28(12):2272-2281
pubmed: 32845582
Health Aff (Millwood). 2000 May-Jun;19(3):236-40
pubmed: 10812803
Implement Sci. 2007 Jan 04;2:1
pubmed: 17204143
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002 Oct;7(4):239-44
pubmed: 12425783
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Apr 16;19(1):230
pubmed: 30991999
Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(15):1390-400
pubmed: 25243763
Med Teach. 2019 Sep;41(9):1002-1006
pubmed: 30261797
BMC Res Notes. 2016 Sep 13;9(1):442
pubmed: 27623764
Perspect Med Educ. 2019 Apr;8(2):90-97
pubmed: 30953335
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2011 Jul;16 Suppl 2:48-60
pubmed: 21737529
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
Phys Ther. 2019 Mar 1;99(3):286-296
pubmed: 30698783
J Adv Nurs. 2016 Dec;72(12):2954-2965
pubmed: 27221824
BMC Med. 2019 May 7;17(1):88
pubmed: 31064388
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2010 Jun 01;3:33-47
pubmed: 21197354