Marko Simunovic1, Angela Coates, Andrew Smith, Lehana Thabane, Charles H Goldsmith, Mark N Levine. 1. The Department of Surgery, McMaster University, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, Ont., the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont., and the Department of Oncology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Ont.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Theory suggests the uptake of a medical innovation is influenced by how potential adopters perceive innovation characteristics and by characteristics of potential adopters. Innovation adoption is slow among the first 20% of individuals in a target group and then accelerates. The Quality Initiative in Rectal Cancer (QIRC) trial assessed if rectal cancer surgery outcomes could be improved through surgeon participation in the QIRC strategy. We tested if traditional uptake of innovation concepts applied to surgeons in the experimental arm of the trial. METHODS: The QIRC strategy included workshops, access to opinion leaders, intraoperative demonstrations, postoperative questionnaires, and audit and feedback. For intraoperative demonstrations, a participating surgeon invited an outside surgeon to demonstrate optimal rectal surgery techniques. We used surgeon timing in a demonstration to differentiate early and late adopters of the QIRC strategy. Surgeons completed surveys on perceptions of the strategy and personal characteristics. RESULTS:Nineteen of 56 surgeons (34%) requested an operative demonstration on their first case of rectal surgery. Early and late adopters had similar perceptions of the QIRC strategy and similar characteristics. Late adopters were less likely than early adopters to perceive an advantage for the surgical techniques promoted by the trial (p = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Most traditional diffusion of innovation concepts did not apply to surgeons in the QIRC trial, with the exception of the importance of perceptions of comparative advantage.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Theory suggests the uptake of a medical innovation is influenced by how potential adopters perceive innovation characteristics and by characteristics of potential adopters. Innovation adoption is slow among the first 20% of individuals in a target group and then accelerates. The Quality Initiative in Rectal Cancer (QIRC) trial assessed if rectal cancer surgery outcomes could be improved through surgeon participation in the QIRC strategy. We tested if traditional uptake of innovation concepts applied to surgeons in the experimental arm of the trial. METHODS: The QIRC strategy included workshops, access to opinion leaders, intraoperative demonstrations, postoperative questionnaires, and audit and feedback. For intraoperative demonstrations, a participating surgeon invited an outside surgeon to demonstrate optimal rectal surgery techniques. We used surgeon timing in a demonstration to differentiate early and late adopters of the QIRC strategy. Surgeons completed surveys on perceptions of the strategy and personal characteristics. RESULTS: Nineteen of 56 surgeons (34%) requested an operative demonstration on their first case of rectal surgery. Early and late adopters had similar perceptions of the QIRC strategy and similar characteristics. Late adopters were less likely than early adopters to perceive an advantage for the surgical techniques promoted by the trial (p = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Most traditional diffusion of innovation concepts did not apply to surgeons in the QIRC trial, with the exception of the importance of perceptions of comparative advantage.
Authors: Dave Davis; Mike Evans; Alex Jadad; Laure Perrier; Darlyne Rath; David Ryan; Gary Sibbald; Sharon Straus; Susan Rappolt; Maria Wowk; Merrick Zwarenstein Journal: BMJ Date: 2003-07-05
Authors: J M Grimshaw; R E Thomas; G MacLennan; C Fraser; C R Ramsay; L Vale; P Whitty; M P Eccles; L Matowe; L Shirran; M Wensing; R Dijkstra; C Donaldson Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Marko Simunovic; Angela Coates; Charles H Goldsmith; Lehana Thabane; Dana Reeson; Andrew Smith; Robin S McLeod; Franco DeNardi; Timothy J Whelan; Mark N Levine Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-08-09 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Marko Simunovic; Charles Goldsmith; Lehana Thabane; Robin McLeod; Franco Denardi; Timothy J Whelan; Mark N Levine Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2008-02-15 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Mary Ann O'Brien; Cathy Charles; Peter Lovrics; Frances C Wright; Tim Whelan; Marko Simunovic; Erin Kennedy; Eva Grunfeld Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2014-11-29 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Emma R Allanson; Özge Tunçalp; Joshua P Vogel; Dina N Khan; Olufemi T Oladapo; Qian Long; Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2017-07-20
Authors: Roger Y Kim; Nandita Mitra; Stephen J Bagley; Melina E Marmarelis; Andrew R Haas; Katharine A Rendle; Anil Vachani Journal: JTO Clin Res Rep Date: 2021-05-18