OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of two training strategies to promote the use of research evidence in speech and language therapy (SLT) management of poststroke dysphagia. DESIGN: Pragmatic, cluster randomized trial. SETTING:Seventeen SLT departments in north-west England. PARTICIPANTS: Two SLTs from each department received training and cascaded information across their department. Process of care was measured from the notes of 708 patients with acute poststroke dysphagia across eight departments allocated to training strategy A, and 762 patients across nine departments in strategy B. INTERVENTIONS: Strategy A: training on the critical appraisal of published research papers and practice guidelines. Strategy B: strategy A plus training on management of change in clinical practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pre- and post-training adherence to practice guidelines in poststroke dysphagia management, based on a review of case notes. Incremental cost of increased adherence to clinical guidelines. RESULTS: Departments' practice differed in adherence to guidelines. Departments changed following training (F=2.22, df 16, 1436, p=0.004). The effect of training strategy on clinical practice was not significant. Strategy B departments engaged in more activities relating to research use following training than strategy A. Total costs of training averaged ł2001, 2892 Euros, $3886 (SD ł502, 726 Euros, $975) for strategy A and ł3366, 4866 Euros, $6537 (SD ł2121, 3066 Euros, $4119) for strategy B. CONCLUSIONS: Training in research implementation in addition to critical appraisal and guideline introduction is associated with increased dissemination activities and awareness of research information, but not with changes in clinical practice within six months of training. The department in which SLTs work influences their use of research. The process of poststroke dysphagia management can be measured using a tool developed from practice guidelines.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of two training strategies to promote the use of research evidence in speech and language therapy (SLT) management of poststroke dysphagia. DESIGN: Pragmatic, cluster randomized trial. SETTING: Seventeen SLT departments in north-west England. PARTICIPANTS: Two SLTs from each department received training and cascaded information across their department. Process of care was measured from the notes of 708 patients with acute poststroke dysphagia across eight departments allocated to training strategy A, and 762 patients across nine departments in strategy B. INTERVENTIONS: Strategy A: training on the critical appraisal of published research papers and practice guidelines. Strategy B: strategy A plus training on management of change in clinical practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pre- and post-training adherence to practice guidelines in poststroke dysphagia management, based on a review of case notes. Incremental cost of increased adherence to clinical guidelines. RESULTS: Departments' practice differed in adherence to guidelines. Departments changed following training (F=2.22, df 16, 1436, p=0.004). The effect of training strategy on clinical practice was not significant. Strategy B departments engaged in more activities relating to research use following training than strategy A. Total costs of training averaged ł2001, 2892 Euros, $3886 (SD ł502, 726 Euros, $975) for strategy A and ł3366, 4866 Euros, $6537 (SD ł2121, 3066 Euros, $4119) for strategy B. CONCLUSIONS: Training in research implementation in addition to critical appraisal and guideline introduction is associated with increased dissemination activities and awareness of research information, but not with changes in clinical practice within six months of training. The department in which SLTs work influences their use of research. The process of poststroke dysphagia management can be measured using a tool developed from practice guidelines.
Authors: Olivia King; Emma West; Sarah Lee; Kristen Glenister; Claire Quilliam; Anna Wong Shee; Hannah Beks Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-05-19 Impact factor: 3.263
Authors: Louise Forsetlund; Arild Bjørndal; Arash Rashidian; Gro Jamtvedt; Mary Ann O'Brien; Fredric Wolf; Dave Davis; Jan Odgaard-Jensen; Andrew D Oxman Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2009-04-15
Authors: Liana S Cahill; Leeanne M Carey; Natasha A Lannin; Megan Turville; Cheryl L Neilson; Elizabeth A Lynch; Carol E McKinstry; Jia Xi Han; Denise O'Connor Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-10-15
Authors: Shannon D Scott; Lauren Albrecht; Kathy O'Leary; Geoff D C Ball; Lisa Hartling; Anne Hofmeyer; C Allyson Jones; Terry P Klassen; Katharina Kovacs Burns; Amanda S Newton; David Thompson; Donna M Dryden Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Nancy M Salbach; Sharon Wood-Dauphinee; Johanne Desrosiers; Janice J Eng; Ian D Graham; Susan B Jaglal; Nicol Korner-Bitensky; Marilyn MacKay-Lyons; Nancy E Mayo; Carol L Richards; Robert W Teasell; Merrick Zwarenstein; Mark T Bayley Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 7.327