Identifying the conditions needed for integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care organizations: qualitative interviews with researchers and research users.

Anna R Gagliardi,Mark J Dobrow

doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1533-0

Abstract

BackgroundCollaboration among researchers and research users, or integrated knowledge translation (IKT), enhances the relevance and uptake of evidence into policy and practice. However, it is not widely practiced and, even when well-resourced, desired impacts may not be achieved. Given that large-scale investment is not the norm, further research is needed to identify how IKT can be optimized.MethodsInterviews were conducted with researchers and research users (clinicians, managers) in a health care delivery (HCDO) and health care monitoring (HCMO) organization that differed in size and infrastructure, and were IKT-naïve. Basic qualitative description was used. Participants were asked about IKT activities and challenges, and recommendations for optimizing IKT. Data were analysed inductively using constant comparative technique.ResultsForty-three interviews were conducted (28 HCDO, 15 HCMO) with 13 researchers, 8 clinicians, and 22 managers. Little to no IKT took place. Participants articulated similar challenges and recommendations revealing that a considerable number of changes were needed at the organizational, professional and individual levels. Given the IKT-absent state of participating organizations, this research identified a core set of conditions which must be addressed to prepare an environment conducive to IKT. These conditions were compiled into a framework by which organizations can plan for, or evaluate their capacity for IKT.ConclusionsThe IKT capacity framework is relevant for organizations in which there is no current IKT activity. Use of the IKT framework may result in more organizations that are ready to initiate and establish IKT, perhaps ultimately leading to more, and higher-quality collaboration for health system innovation. Further research is needed to confirm these findings in other organizations not yet resourced for, or undertaking IKT, and to explore the resource implications and mechanisms for establishing the conditions identified here as essential to preparing for IKT.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1533-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

Collaboration among researchers and research users, or integrated knowledge translation (IKT), enhances the relevance and uptake of evidence into policy and practice
Participants A total of 43 interviews were conducted with researchers, clinicians, and managers in the health care delivery organization (HCDO) (28 of 54 invited) and health care monitoring (HCMO) (15 of 20 invited) organizations (Table 1)
IKT not practiced but desirable While participants from both organizations were engaged in generating and using a broad spectrum of academic research aimed at improving health services and outcomes, they stated that IKT was not used to do so

Summary

Introduction

Collaboration among researchers and research users, or integrated knowledge translation (IKT), enhances the relevance and uptake of evidence into policy and practice. Implementation science investigates why such circumstances exist, and how to promote the use of evidence in health care decision-making [4] It draws upon an array of disciplines, necessitating collaboration among individuals with different expertise (theoretical, professional, methodological) and roles (researchers, research users) to fully understand how complex health care problems can be addressed. Others have recognized that engaged scholarship blends the different perspectives of researchers and decision-makers such that the knowledge produced is relevant to real world problems [5] This co-production of knowledge is more commonly referred to as integrated knowledge translation (IKT), and defined as an ongoing relationship between researchers and research users for the purpose of collaboratively engaging in a mutually beneficial research project or programme of research to support decisionmaking [6]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion