Image from Google Jackets

Dissemination and adoption of comparative effectiveness research findings when findings challenge current practices / Eric C. Schneider [and four others].

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextSeries: Technical report (Rand Corporation)Publisher: Santa Monica, CA : RAND, 2011Description: 1 online resourceContent type:
  • text
Media type:
  • computer
Carrier type:
  • online resource
ISBN:
  • 0833079360
  • 9780833079367
Subject(s): Genre/Form: DDC classification:
  • 610.72 23
LOC classification:
  • R852 .S36 2011eb
Online resources:
Contents:
Introduction and summary of approach -- CATIE case study -- COURAGE case-study report -- SPORT case-study report -- COMPANION case-study report -- CPOE case-study report -- Factors influencing the translation of CER research into new clinical practices: a synthesis of themes from the case studies -- Policy implications of the case-study results.
Summary: Insufficient evidence regarding the effectiveness of medical treatments has been identified as a key source of inefficiency in the U.S. healthcare system. Variation in the use of diagnostic tests and treatments for patient with similar symptoms or conditions has been attributed to clinical uncertainty, since the published scientific evidence base does not provide adequate information to determine which treatments are most effective for patients with specific clinical needs. The federal government has made a dramatic investment in comparative effectiveness research (CER), with the expectation that CER will influence clinical practice and improve the efficiency of healthcare delivery. To do this, CER must provide information that supports fundamental changes in healthcare delivery and informs the choice of diagnostic and treatment strategies. This report summarizes findings from a qualitative analysis of the factors that impede the translation of CER into clinical practice and those that facilitate it. A case-study methodology is used to explore the extent to which these factors led to changes in clinical practice following five recent key CER studies. The enabling factors and barriers to translation for each study are discussed, the root causes for the failure of translation common to the studies are synthesized, and policy options that may optimize the impact of future CER--particularly CER funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009--are proposed.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

"RAND Health."

Document formatted into pages; contains 132 pages.

Title from title screen (viewed November 28, 2011).

Includes bibliographical references.

Introduction and summary of approach -- CATIE case study -- COURAGE case-study report -- SPORT case-study report -- COMPANION case-study report -- CPOE case-study report -- Factors influencing the translation of CER research into new clinical practices: a synthesis of themes from the case studies -- Policy implications of the case-study results.

Insufficient evidence regarding the effectiveness of medical treatments has been identified as a key source of inefficiency in the U.S. healthcare system. Variation in the use of diagnostic tests and treatments for patient with similar symptoms or conditions has been attributed to clinical uncertainty, since the published scientific evidence base does not provide adequate information to determine which treatments are most effective for patients with specific clinical needs. The federal government has made a dramatic investment in comparative effectiveness research (CER), with the expectation that CER will influence clinical practice and improve the efficiency of healthcare delivery. To do this, CER must provide information that supports fundamental changes in healthcare delivery and informs the choice of diagnostic and treatment strategies. This report summarizes findings from a qualitative analysis of the factors that impede the translation of CER into clinical practice and those that facilitate it. A case-study methodology is used to explore the extent to which these factors led to changes in clinical practice following five recent key CER studies. The enabling factors and barriers to translation for each study are discussed, the root causes for the failure of translation common to the studies are synthesized, and policy options that may optimize the impact of future CER--particularly CER funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009--are proposed.

JSTOR Books at JSTOR Open Access