Getting Research Into Practice Research Articles

Foreword: Lesson learning about getting research into policy and practice

ForewordThe UK Department for International Development (DFID) is committed to investing in research to combat poverty, reduce high mortality and morbidity in resource poor contexts and support progress towards meeting the Millennium Development Goals. Research helps us to identify what works, what does not work and how to understand the local context when introducing new ways of working. There is no point doing research if the findings do not get into policy and practice. DFID strongly encourages all research programmes to consider research uptake activities as an integral part of the research.This special supplement draws on the work of the Sexual Health HIV Evidence into Practice (SHHEP) initiative. SHHEP is a collaboration across four DFID Research Programme Consortia (RPC) that undertake research and action on HIV and Sexual and Reproductive Health in resource poor contexts. Each consortium consists of 5 or more research, advocacy or service provider institutions from the south and the north working together over a five year period on critical areas of sexual and reproductive health. The essence of SHHEP is to share learning on research uptake and research engagement in Sexual and Reproductive Health, including HIV. The group has formulated a range of targeted mechanisms to communicate health research to different audiences and spearhead change, and were finalists for the British Medical Journal 2010 Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) prize.The papers in this special supplement focus on lesson learning on getting research into policy and practice. They highlight the range of methodologies and approaches researchers and communication specialists have used in different contexts to try to ensure research does not simply gather dust on library shelves but feeds into and is relevant to policy and practice in different contexts (for example South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Ghana, Bangladesh) and on a diversity of topic areas (Gender based violence, sexualities, orphans and vulnerable children, HIV care and treatment including male circumcision, cotrimoxazole and links with nutrition).The work reported in this supplement provides examples of approaches that have been tried and from which other researchers can learn. They demonstrate that getting research into policy and practice is complex, dynamic and multi-faceted; and a wide range of context and issue specific conceptual and practical approaches have to be used. I hope that the innovative approaches and promising ways forward, presented in these papers, will inspire and motivate others.Professor Christopher WhittyDirector Research and Evidence DivisionDepartment for International DevelopmentDr Sue KinnHead of Health ResearchDepartment for International Development

Implementation of a protocol for the prevention and management of extravasation injuries in the neonatal intensive care patient

This project sought to determine nurses' understanding and management of infants with intravenous (IV) therapy. There were three specific aims: • To improve identification and management of extravasation injuries in neonates • To ensure management of extravasation injuries in neonates is classified according to IV extravasation staging guidelines • To develop a protocol that outlined actions required to manage extravasation injuries. This project utilised a pre- and post-implementation audit strategy using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Getting Research into Practice (GRIP) program. This method has been used to improve clinical practice by utilising an audit, feedback and re-audit sequence. The project was implemented in four stages over a 7-month period from 21 October 2009 to 30 May 2010. Initially, there was poor compliance with all four criteria, ranging from zero to 63%. The GRIP phase of the project identified five barriers which were addressed throughout this project. These related to education of staff and the development of a protocol for the prevention and management of extravasation injuries in the neonatal population. Following implementation of best practice, the second audit showed a marked improvement in all four criteria, ranging from 70 to 100% compliance. Overall, this project has led to improvements in clinical practice in line with current evidence. This has resulted in enhanced awareness of the risks associated with IV therapy and of measures to prevent an injury occurring within this clinical setting.

Implementation of best practice for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in an acute care setting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is the commonest side-effect for patients undergoing cancer treatment with chemotherapy. These symptoms can lead to nutritional deficiencies, dehydration and electrolyte imbalance, and negative impacts on quality of life. However, wide gaps exist between clinician and patient perceptions of nausea and vomiting. Effective communication about these symptoms is essential for proper treatment. We conducted a recent chart review to identify gaps in practice regarding chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting assessment and documentation. The goal of this project was to improve local practice in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer. This study used one pre- and two post-implementation audit strategies utilising the Joanna Briggs Institute Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System (JBI-PACES) and Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) module. The study was conducted in the 33-bed oncology ward of a large acute care hospital in Korea from February 2010 to June 2010. To facilitate evidence-based nursing practice, audit-feedback-re-audit cycles strategies were used. The audits included four criteria recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute. There were statistically significant improvements in all four criteria. The first post-implementation audit showed that all four audit criteria rated >50% in compliance. At the second follow-up audit, all four audit criteria rated 100% compliance, indicating excellent compliance with best practice. The differences between the pre- and post-data were statistically significant (P < 0.001) for all four audit criteria. The results indicate that the pre- and post-implementation audits are an effective method in improvement of assessment, documentation and evidence-based nursing implementation for cancer symptom management.