scholarly journals High-Intensity vs Low-Intensity Knowledge Translation Interventions for Surgeons and Their Association With Process and Outcome Measures Among Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. e2117536
Author(s):  
Marko Simunovic ◽  
David Robert Urbach ◽  
Christine Fahim ◽  
Mary Ann O’Brien ◽  
Craig C. Earle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Low Intensity ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Knowledge Translation Interventions

scholarly journals A method to audit and score implementation of knowledge translation (KT) interventions in large health regions – an observational pilot study using rectal cancer surgery in Ontario

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Simunovic ◽  
Christine Fahim ◽  
Angela Coates ◽  
David Urbach ◽  
Craig Earle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Intervention Implementation ◽  
Cancer Agency ◽  
Quantitative Analyses

Abstract Background: Across Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery. Methods: We interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored KT intervention implementation using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20-100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation. Results: There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38). Conclusion: Our methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for region-level quality of rectal cancer surgery.

scholarly journals A method to audit and score implementation of knowledge translation (KT) interventions in large health regions – an observational pilot study using rectal cancer surgery in Ontario

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Simunovic ◽  
Christine Fahim ◽  
Angela Coates ◽  
David Urbach ◽  
Craig Earle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Cancer Agency

Abstract Background: Across Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province the KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery. Methods: We interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. Using a modified Delphi approach, KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored implementation of KT interventions using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20-100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation. Results: There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38). Conclusion: Our methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities outside of those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for quality of rectal cancer surgery.

scholarly journals A method to audit and score implementation of knowledge translation (KT) interventions in large health regions – an observational pilot study using rectal cancer surgery in Ontario

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Simunovic ◽  
Christine Fahim ◽  
Angela Coates ◽  
David Urbach ◽  
Craig Earle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Intervention Implementation ◽  
Cancer Agency ◽  
Quantitative Analyses

Abstract Background: Across Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery. Methods: We interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored KT intervention implementation using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20-100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation. Results: There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38). Conclusion: Our methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for region-level quality of rectal cancer surgery.

scholarly journals A method to audit and score implementation of knowledge translation (KT) interventions in large health regions – an observational pilot study using rectal cancer surgery in Ontario

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Simunovic ◽  
Christine Fahim ◽  
Angela Coates ◽  
David Urbach ◽  
Craig Earle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Intervention Implementation ◽  
Cancer Agency ◽  
Quantitative Analyses

Abstract Background: Across Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province the KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery. Methods: We interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored implementation of KT interventions using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20-100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation. Results: There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38). Conclusion: Our methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for region-level quality of rectal cancer surgery.

scholarly journals Identifying a region-level ‘Knowledge Translation Signature’ in rectal cancer surgery – an observational pilot study

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Simunovic ◽  
Christine Fahim ◽  
Angela Coates ◽  
David Urbach ◽  
Craig Earle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Rectal Surgery ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Cancer Agency

Abstract Background Knowledge translation (KT) interventions can facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practice and help close quality gaps. Across Ontario, since approximately the year 2006, numerous KT interventions have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 Local Health Integrated Networks (LHINs). We piloted a methodology to summarize and score at the LHIN level all KT activities implemented to improve the quality of rectal surgery (i.e., a KT Signature score).Methods We interviewed stakeholders to identify KT interventions used in respective LHINs over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. KT experts reviewed and scored final summaries using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores for each item ranged from 1 – 5. Thus scores could range from 20-100 for each LHIN.Results There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced KT Signature scores for each LHIN that were bimodally distributed with an average score for 2 LHINs of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 LHINs of 30.5 (range 22-38).Conclusion Related to region level KT interventions to improve rectal cancer surgery quality, we identified two KT Signature types. Scores in 12 Ontario LHINs were low reflecting minimal efforts. Two LHINs had high scores reflecting implementation of numerous KT interventions in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency. Our methods and results require further validation. But they should be of interest to stakeholders implementing interventions designed to improve medical care at a population level.

Impact of Specialisation in the Practice of Rectal Cancer Surgery at a District General Hospital

Endoscopy ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
AL Gidwani ◽  
RS Date ◽  
D Hughes ◽  
P Neilly ◽  
R Gilliland
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
District General Hospital ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document