Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEames, S
dc.contributor.authorBennett, S
dc.contributor.authorWhitehead, M
dc.contributor.authorFleming, J
dc.contributor.authorLow, SO
dc.contributor.authorMickan, S
dc.contributor.authorCaldwell, E
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-11T12:32:12Z
dc.date.available2019-07-11T12:32:12Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn0045-0766
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1440-1630.12483
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/381647
dc.description.abstractBackground/aim: Knowledge translation (KT) aims to reduce research‐practice gaps. Few studies have investigated methods to build clinicians’ capacity for KT. To: (i) evaluate the impact of a multifaceted KT capacity‐building intervention; (ii) understand barriers and enablers to clinicians’ use of KT; and (iii) identify useful strategies. Methods: A pre‐post study to develop KT capacity amongst occupational therapy clinicians (n = 46) in a large metropolitan hospital. A customised questionaire (baseline and 18 months) identified KT‐related behaviours and barriers and enablers guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were completed on matched data (n = 20). At follow‐up additional items explored perceptions of change and usefulness of strategies. Results: At follow‐up, participants had read more clinical guidelines (10 vs. 17) and more participants reported using strategies to increase the use of recommended clinical practices (P = 0.006). The main barriers at baseline were from the TDF domains of ‘attention, memory and decision processes’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘environmental context and resources’, while main enablers were from ‘social/professional role and identity’, ‘reinforcement’, ‘social influence’ and ‘beliefs about consequences’ domains. At follow‐up, significant improvements were seen in ‘knowledge’ (p < 0.001), ‘environmental context & resources’ (P < 0.001), ‘skills’ (P = 0.008) ‘beliefs about consequences’ (P = 0.011), ‘beliefs about capabilities’ (P = 0.018), and ‘memory, attention & decision processes’ (P = 0.048) and participants agreed that KT had become part of the departments’ culture. Strategies perceived most useful included working as a team, having a dedicated staff member, mentoring meetings, department leader support, learning about KT over time, and training sessions. Conclusions: The KT capacity‐building intervention changed one clinician‐reported behaviour and perceived impact of barriers across six domains. Clinicians reported perceived improvement in understanding of – and confidence in – KT, and changes in the culture to one of engaging with KT as part of clinical practice. Further research into KT capacity building is needed.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia
dc.publisher.placeAustralia
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom479
dc.relation.ispartofpageto493
dc.relation.ispartofissue6
dc.relation.ispartofjournalAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal
dc.relation.ispartofvolume65
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPublic Health and Health Services not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchClinical Sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPublic Health and Health Services
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode111799
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1103
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1117
dc.titleA pre-post evaluation of a knowledge translation capacity-building intervention
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorMickan, Sharon M.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record