Family Practice Vol. 18, No. 4, 353-355
© Oxford University Press 2001
Editorial |
Why does primary care need more implementation research?
a Department of Reproductive and Developmental Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH3 9ET,
b Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle, 21 Claremont Place, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE3 4AH and
c Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK.
Foy R, Eccles M and Grimshaw J. Why does primary care need more implementation research? Family Practice 2001; 18: 353–355.
Received 10 January 2001; Accepted 12 March 2001.
How can we improve the quality of primary care?
Clinical research continually produces new findings that can contribute to effective and efficient patient care. However, such research cannot change patient outcomes unless health services and health care professionals adopt them in practice. Uneven uptake of research findings—and thus inappropriate care—occurs across different health care settings, countries and specialities, as demonstrated by two papers on implementing evidence-based medicine published in this issue of Family Practice.1,2
In primary care, the detection and management of risks related to hypertension3 or hyperlipidaemia are highly variable.4 The impact of secondary prevention, including the administration of secondary prophylactic drugs to patients surviving a myocardial infarction, is reduced by similar disparities.5–7 Much of this variation
What is known?
Limitations of the evidence
What is needed?
Conclusion
References
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  O. Bhattacharyya, S. Reeves, and M. Zwarenstein What Is Implementation Research?: Rationale, Concepts, and Practices Research on Social Work Practice, September 1, 2009; 19(5): 491 - 502. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 I. Shcherbatykh, A. Holbrook, L. Thabane, L. Dolovich, and COMPETE III investigators Methodologic Issues in Health Informatics Trials: The Complexities of Complex Interventions J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., September 1, 2008; 15(5): 575 - 580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Varonen, U.-M. Rautakorpi, S. Nyberg, P. O Honkanen, T. Klaukka, E. Palva, R. Roine, H. Sarkkinen, M. Makela, P. Huovinen, et al. Implementing guidelines on acute maxillary sinusitis in general practice--a randomized controlled trial Fam. Pract., April 1, 2007; 24(2): 201 - 206. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Segaar, C Bolman, M. Willemsen, and H De Vries Identifying determinants of protocol adoption by midwives: a comprehensive approach Health Educ. Res., February 1, 2007; 22(1): 14 - 26. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Gregory, Y. Bostock, and K. Backett-Milburn Recovering from a heart attack: a qualitative study into lay experiences and the struggle to make lifestyle changes Fam. Pract., April 1, 2006; 23(2): 220 - 225. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Grimshaw, M. Eccles, M. Campbell, and D. Elbourne Cluster Randomized Trials of Professional and Organizational Behavior Change Interventions in Health Care Settings The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, May 1, 2005; 599(1): 71 - 93. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Pennington, H. Roddam, C. Burton, I. Russell, and D. Russell Promoting research use in speech and language therapy: a cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the clinical effectiveness and costs of two training strategies Clinical Rehabilitation, April 1, 2005; 19(4): 387 - 397. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. De Maeseneer and A. De Sutter Why Research in Family Medicine? A Superfluous Question Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2004; 2(suppl_2): S17 - S22. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Donner and N. Klar Pitfalls of and Controversies in Cluster Randomization Trials Am J Public Health, March 1, 2004; 94(3): 416 - 422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Eccles, N. Rousseau, E. McColl, J. Newton, and J. Grimshaw Computerised evidence based guidelines in primary care: Authors' reply BMJ, May 15, 2003; 326(7398): 1088 - 1088. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Eccles, E. McColl, N. Steen, N. Rousseau, J. Grimshaw, D. Parkin, and I. Purves Effect of computerised evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial BMJ, October 26, 2002; 325(7370): 941 - 941. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|