Facilitating Evidence-Informed Practice Participatory Knowledge Translation & Exchange

1. Facilitating Evidence-Informed PracticeParticipatory Knowledge Translation & Exchange Actionable Knowledge Team (Australia) Leah Bromfield, Robyn Mildon, Fiona Arney, Kerry Lewig, Annette Michaux & Greg Antcliff

2. Actionable Knowledge Team (AKT) Dr Leah Bromfield Australian Institute of Family Studies Dr Robyn Mildon Parenting Research Centre Dr Fiona Arney Menzies School of Health Research Annette Michaux & Greg Antcliff The Benevolent Society Kerry Lewig (not attending) University of South Australia

3. Knowledge Translation & Exchange (KTE) KTE guides strategies to enhance evidence-informed practice KTE = interactive interchange of knowledge and activities between research users and research producers Best evidence suggests knowledge transfer most effective where there is a genuine interaction between research users and research producers

4. More than just interaction? Interactive KTE strategies = different ways of bringing researchers and service providers together, Limit = situate service providers as recipients of research findings (albeit active recipients) MEBP highlights the importance of service providers having power and agency in determining the relevance of research to their context

5. Building on other areas Participatory research Researchers and end users as a team i.e. enquiry with Co-production Active input by the people who use services and those who have traditionally provided them Contrasts with approaches that treat people as passive recipients of services designed and delivered by someone else

6. Participatory KTE Knowledge transfer: Dissemination without interaction Interactive KTE: Brings researchers/research disseminators and research users together Participatory KTE: Equal and active partnership between researchers/research disseminators and research users e.g. policy makers, service organisations, service providers, service users

7. Key concepts Evidence Evidence-informed practice Instrumental & conceptual research use ‘Push’ and ‘pull’ strategies Tailoring Degree of engagement Underlying mechanisms

8. Underlying mechanisms Dissemination Interaction Social influence Facilitation Incentives and reinforcement

9. Planning for optimal KTE degree of engagement x underlying mechanisms = strategies

10. Developing Practice Guides: Co-producing knowledge Context & collaborators Purpose What is being “produced” KTE Strategies KTE mechanisms Strengths & Limitations

11. What is being “produced” Evidence-based kernels (Embry & Biglan, 2008) Fundamental units of behavioural influence that underlie effective interventions

12. Kernel for increasing behaviour Kernel - Safety or performance lottery Description - Tokens or reward tickets given for observed safety or performance behaviour Behaviours affected - Safety behaviours, accident reduction, improved or work performance Geller et al. (1982), Putnam et al. (2003), Roberts and Fanurik (1986), Saari and Latham (1982)

13. Kernel for increasing behaviour Kernel - Special play Description - Adult plays with the child, but lets the child lead in determining what games will be played and how Behaviours affected - Improved stress physiology, compliance, and social competence; reduced trauma or depressive symptoms Bratton et al. (2005)

14. Implementation “Once models and best practices are identified, practitioners are faced with the challenge of implementing programs properly. A poorly implemented program can lead to failure as easily as a poorly designed one” (Mihalic et al, 2004)

15. Implementation: Core Components staff selection training ongoing consultation and coaching staff and program evaluation facilitative administrative support systems interventions Fixsen et al., 2005

16. Conclusions No “one size fits all” approach to KTE Tailored participatory approaches have theoretical promise increase ownership, relevance, uptake Time & resource intensive Not always feasible - more likely for organisations to commit for ‘pull’ than ‘push’ strategies Challenges for researchers & practitioners Evaluation (outcome + cost-benefit) needed