Implementation May Be a Science, But, Alas, Medicine Remains an Art

By KIM BELLARD I’ve been working in healthcare for over forty (!) years now, in one form or another, but it wasn’t until this past week that I heard of implementation science.  Which, in a way, is sort of the problem healthcare has.  Granted, I’m not a doctor or other clinician, but everyone working in healthcare should be aware of, and thinking a lot about, “the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other EBPs into routine practice, and, hence, to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services” (Bauer, et. al).  It took a JAMA article, by Rita Rubin, to alert me to this intriguing science: It Takes an Average of 17 Years for Evidence to Change Practice—the Burgeoning Field of Implementation Science Seeks to Speed Things Up. It turns out that implementation science is nothing new. There has been a journal devoted to it (cleverly named Implementation Science) since 2006, along with the relatively newer Implementation Science Communications. Both focus on articles that illustrate “methods to promote the uptake of research findings into routine healthcare in clinical, organizational, or policy contexts.”  Brian Mittman, Ph.D., has stated that the aims of implementation science are: “To generate reliable strategies for improving health-related processes and outcomes and to facilitate the widespread adoption of these strategies. To produce insights and generalizable kn...
Source: The Health Care Blog - Category: Consumer Health News Authors: Tags: Medical Practice Health care tech Implementation Kim Bellard Source Type: blogs