Implementation science is about bridging the research-to-practice gap. What does this mean?
Implementation science can be described as the study of ways to promote the adoption of evidence-based practices, interventions and policies into routine health care and public health settings, and ultimately to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services and care available to patients.
Consider this quote, taken from a summary published on the NIH National Library of Medicine website:
“The objective of implementation science is to incorporate new findings into clinical practice. On average it takes 17 years to convert just 14 percent of original research into benefits for patients, said David Chambers, deputy director for implementation science at the National Cancer Institute (Balas and Boren, 2000). Furthermore, the 17 years does not include how long it takes to develop and perform the research.”
📚 Interested in learning more about Implementation Science? Be sure to check out some of the following readings:
- An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4573926/
- Implementation Research – what is it? https://www.slideshare.net/COREGroup1/core-2015-spring-meeting-ir-concurrent-session-final
Reporting on implementation science
A journalist who has been following the science of new HIV prevention interventions needs to follow the process from the research and scientific evidence stages, through to implementation – as this is the stage where ‘the science truly reaches the public’. Some of a journalist’s best allies in telling these types of stories are health and HIV prevention advocates and activists, who hold policymakers to account for ensuring that the best science ultimately gets to benefit people in the public health system.
Unfortunately, there are barriers that often prevent the implementation of research and effective global health programming, and these include a lack of consensus on scientific approaches and standards of evidence, as well as non-adherence to interventions.
🔎 Case Study #1
The above story is written by South African journalist Neli Msomi, who describes herself as “interested in seeing government policies go beyond paper and boardrooms, and see how they translate into action on the ground. At Bhekisisa, Msomi sniffs around studies for solutions that can make access to healthcare better and efficient.” Msomi’s story highlights how it can happen that good science does not translate to good practice – because of a persistent rumor.
While reading the story, challenge yourself to:
- List all the sets of research referenced and implied in the story.
- Identify what type of research / actions / journalistic reporting might be needed to introduce the implant successfully into the public health system in South Africa, given the rumors highlighted in Msomi’s story.
🔎 Case Study #2
The above story is another example of a piece written by a South African journalist, that delves into a series of myths that exist, which could be preventing individuals at risk from accessing an at-the-time newly available HIV prevention pill – which can be taken daily as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).
When you are done reading the story, consider this Abstract from a pilot study that focused on PrEP:
BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been shown to be highly effective for the prevention of HIV in clinical trials and demonstration projects, but PrEP uptake and adherence outside of these settings in the United States has been limited. Lack of knowledge and willingness of health care providers (HCPs) to prescribe PrEP is an important barrier to implementation.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe and examine the feasibility and acceptability of a PrEP Optimization Intervention (PrEP-OI) targeted at HCPs. The ultimate purpose of this intervention was to increase PrEP uptake, adherence, and persistence among those at risk for HIV acquisition.
While considering the above materials, challenge yourself to:
- Come up with a story idea inspired by the above Pilot Study.
- Consider the different angles you could potentially look into, regarding low PrEP uptake and/or adherence – for example, you might consider whether low uptake and/or adherence could be as a result of a lack of political will OR prohibitive costs OR discrimination OR public mistrust, etc.
- Identify a list of advocates and/or scientists who could be contacted as sources, to help make the case for increased PrEP uptake, adherence, and persistence among those at risk for HIV acquisition.
📚 Want to find out about more studies, pilots, campaigns, and demonstration projects related to HIV prevention? Be sure to click through the following links:
-
- Opposites Attract | A TasP Study | Ending HIV
- Prevention Access Campaign – The revolution in living and loving with HIV
- Search | AVAC Keyword: Demonstration
- Search | AVAC Keyword: Pilot