Revisiting time to translation: implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in cancer control
Revisiting time to translation: implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in cancer control
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10552-020-01376-z
复制
发表时间：
2021-01-04
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Neta, Gila
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Khan, Shahnaz;Chambers, David;Neta, Gila
目的以往的研究估计将研究证据转化为实践需要17年时间。然而，这一估计并不是癌症控制循证实践(EBP)所特有的，这些研究也没有评估翻译过程中的差异。我们研究了癌症控制EBPs的翻译途径。方法我们选择了5个可获得摄取数据的癌症对照EBPs。测量了从里程碑式的发表到临床指南发布到实施的时间，定义为50%的摄取率。绘制每个EBP的翻译路径图，并计算跨越EBP的平均总时间。结果5个癌症控制EBP包括：乳房摄影、临床医生戒烟建议、结直肠癌筛查、HPV联合检测和HPV疫苗接种。从发布到实施的时间从13年到21年不等，平均为15年。从发布到准则发布的时间为3到17年，从准则发布到执行的时间为4到12年。临床医生的戒烟建议、HPV联合检测和HPV疫苗接种执行最快；结直肠癌筛查和乳房X光检查执行最慢。结论：我们评估的五个EBPS的平均实施时间为15年，与先前的研究结果相比略有改善。尽管较新的EBPS，如HPV疫苗接种和HPV联合检测比其他EBPS执行得更快，但还需要在执行科学方面继续努力，以加快研究转化为实践。
Purpose Previous studies estimate translation of research evidence into practice takes 17 years. However, this estimate is not specific to cancer control evidence-based practices (EBPs), nor do these studies evaluate variation in the translational process. We examined the translational pathway of cancer control EBPs. Methods We selected five cancer control EBPs where data on uptake were readily available. Years from landmark publication to clinical guideline issuance to implementation, defined as 50% uptake, were measured. The translational pathway for each EBP was mapped and an average total time across EBPs was calculated. Results Five cancer control EBPs were included: mammography, clinicians' advice to quit smoking, colorectal cancer screening, HPV co-testing, and HPV vaccination. Time from publication to implementation ranged from 13 to 21 years, averaging 15 years. Time from publication to guideline issuance ranged from 3 to 17 years, and from guideline issuance to implementation, - 4 to 12 years. Clinician's advice to quit smoking, HPV co-testing, and HPV vaccination were most rapidly implemented; colorectal cancer screening and mammography were slowest to implement. Conclusion The average time to implementation was 15 years for the five EBPs we evaluated, a marginal improvement from prior findings. Although newer EBPs such as HPV vaccination and HPV co-testing were faster to implement than other EBPs, continued efforts in implementation science to speed research to practice are needed.