![]() QI involves process mapping and systems thinking and the use of measurement and tools to assess, plan, execute and evaluate changes to improve patient and population outcomes, system performance and professional development ( 4, 5). Improvement science has grown out of the wider quality improvement (QI) movement, which entered health care widely in the late 1980s. In parallel, the field of improvement science developed in the 2000s with similar aims of bridging the gap between ideal and actual care to improve health care quality and, thereby, patient and population outcomes ( 2, 3). The ambition is to reduce the research-to-practice gap that is, the gap between what is known through research to be effective and what is actually practiced or used in various areas of society ( 1). Both evidence-based medicine/practice and implementation science address the untapped potential to improve health and welfare of populations through wider and more systematic use of research findings and implementation of empirically supported (“evidence-based”) practices (i.e., clinical interventions, programmes, services, etc.). ![]() Within health care research and practice, implementation science has emerged as a vital multidisciplinary research field in the wake of the evidence-based medicine/practice movement. To bridge the silos between the fields, increased collaboration between implementation and improvement scholars will help to clarify the differences and connections between the science and practice of improvement, to expand scientific application of quality improvement tools, to further address contextual influences on implementation and improvement efforts, and to share and use theory to support strategy development, delivery and evaluation. Both apply a range of analytical tools to analyse problems and facilitate appropriate solutions.Ĭonclusions: Implementation science and improvement science have similar endpoints but different starting points and academic perspectives. Both describe problems in terms of a gap or chasm between current and optimal care delivery and consider similar strategies to address the problems. The two fields have different origins and draw mostly on different sources of knowledge, but they have a shared goal of using scientific methods to understand and explain how health care services can be improved for their users. Search methods included systematic literature searches in PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO until October 2021 reviewing references in identified articles and books and the authors' own cross-disciplinary knowledge of key literature.įindings: The comparative analysis of the fields of implementation science and improvement science centred on six categories: (1) influences (2) ontology, epistemology and methodology (3) identified problem (4) potential solutions (5) analytical tools and (6) knowledge production and use. Methods: We used a critical literature review approach. The second objective, building on the first, is to highlight aspects of improvement science that potentially could inform implementation science and vice versa. ![]() Objectives: The first objective of this paper is to characterise and contrast implementation science and improvement science. Improvement science has grown out of the wider quality improvement movement, but a fundamental difference between quality improvement and improvement science is that the former generates knowledge for local improvement, whereas the latter is aimed at producing generalizable scientific knowledge. Implementation science was born out of the recognition that research findings and effective practices should be more systematically disseminated and applied in various settings to achieve improved health and welfare of populations. 5Health Service & Population Research Department, Centre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdomīackground: Implementation science and improvement science have similar goals of improving health care services for better patient and population outcomes, yet historically there has been limited exchange between the two fields.4School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.3Sue and Bill Gross School of Nursing, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.2Jönköping University, Jönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare, Jönköping, Sweden.1Division of Society and Health, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.Per Nilsen 1 * Johan Thor 2 Miriam Bender 3 Jennifer Leeman 4 Boel Andersson-Gäre 2 Nick Sevdalis 5
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |