An intermediate step in bridging the gap between evidence and practice: developing and applying a methodology for “general good practices”

Heléna Safadi; Judit Lám; Ivett Baranyi; Éva Belicza

doi:10.53020/IME-2024-403

Heléna Safadi Health Services Management Training Centre, Faculty of Health and Public Administration, Semmelweis University, Budapest; NEVES Society, Budapest https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7064-566X
Judit Lám Health Services Management Training Centre, Faculty of Health and Public Administration, Semmelweis University, Budapest; NEVES Society, Budapest https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9621-1563
Ivett Baranyi Health Services Management Training Centre, Faculty of Health and Public Administration, Semmelweis University, Budapest https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1237-2448
Éva Belicza Health Services Management Training Centre, Faculty of Health and Public Administration, Semmelweis University, Budapest; NEVES Society, Budapest https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2472-1318

DOI: https://doi.org/10.53020/IME-2024-403

Absztrakt

The gap between evidence and clinical practice has been in the focus of researches for decades. Although successful implementation means the new knowledge must work in particular environments, it doesn’t mean that the entire process should exclusively be executed by the individual institutes. This is the point where we assumed that an intermediate step, the “general good practice”, could help to ensure that translation is done in a more professional way.

The development of the general good practice methodology was based on our infinitE model, which organized the factors of successful translation into an evidence-editing-embedding-effect on practice framework, using tools from the disciplines of Evidence-Based Medicine, Quality Improvement and Change Management.

The methodology organised the editing and embedding part of the development into a process involving three full-day sessions carried out with different health professionals, experts and moderators. After pilot testing, it was finalized and applied to other topics as well.

The methodology presented in detail in this paper, centred on flow chart, process analysis, failure mode identification and Kotter’s 8-step model. Beside the pilot topic of the institutional process of resuscitation, the methodology has also proved applicable to more than ten other topics, meaning that at least all the core elements of the proposed bundle of general good practice have been produced in the development process.

Compared to the guidelines, general good practices demonstrate the evidence in operation, helping to develop workflows, responsibilities, documentation, trainings, etc. and can also be a starting point for the digitalisation of care processes.

The next step is to examine how healthcare institutions can build on these in their own editing and embedding activities, and what the results will be. Further studies could explore the applicability of the development methodology in different healthcare systems or at different levels of maturity in terms of quality.