[EBP尺度のレビュー] Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a SR

EBPの分野では、近年、implementation research(実装研究)への関心が非常に高まっています．2006年から発行が始まったImplementation science誌では、この分野の貴重な研究成果が数多く発表されています．

実際に臨床で行われているケアとエビデンスの実装のギャップを埋めていくために、医療従事者のEBPの能力を測る尺度が発表され続け、すでにいくつかのレビュー論文が発表されています．

今回新しく発表されたレビュー論文は、 Khadjesari Zら(2020)によるphysical healthcare settings の分野における実装のアウトカム尺度のレビューで、55のimplementation outcome instrument（65 scales）が特定されました．その結果、研究方法論や心理学的測定の質は全体的に低いことが報告されています．

（参考）Table 1 Summary of methodological quality, psychometric quality and usability, ranked by global COSMIN reliability score across implementation outcome

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

Implementation research aims to facilitate the timely and routine implementation and sustainment of evidence-based interventions and services. A glaring gap in this endeavour is the capability of researchers, healthcare practitioners and managers to quantitatively evaluate implementation efforts using psychometrically sound instruments. To encourage and support the use of precise and accurate implementation outcome measures, this systematic review aimed to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings. The following data sources were searched from inception to March 2019, with no language restrictions: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL and the Cochrane library. Studies that evaluated the measurement properties of implementation outcome instruments in physical healthcare settings were eligible for inclusion. Proctor et al.’s taxonomy of implementation outcomes was used to

Implementation Science

EBPに関連する尺度レビューはこれまでにも発表されており、これまでもEBPの尺度（研究）の方法論の質は全体的に低いことが報告されていますが、この論文のように、近年は、COSMINなどの方法論に基づいて詳細なレビューが増えているようです．

＊なおこのレビューでは、Implementation outcomesの分類は Proctorらの分類、研究方法論の質の評価は COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN)、心理学的測定の質は the Contemporary Psychometrics checklist (ConPsy) が使われました．

Reference.

Khadjesari Z, et al. Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review. Implement Sci . 2020;15(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01027-6.

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

Implementation research aims to facilitate the timely and routine implementation and sustainment of evidence-based interventions and services. A glaring gap in this endeavour is the capability of researchers, healthcare practitioners and managers to quantitatively evaluate implementation efforts using psychometrically sound instruments. To encourage and support the use of precise and accurate implementation outcome measures, this systematic review aimed to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings. The following data sources were searched from inception to March 2019, with no language restrictions: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL and the Cochrane library. Studies that evaluated the measurement properties of implementation outcome instruments in physical healthcare settings were eligible for inclusion. Proctor et al.’s taxonomy of implementation outcomes was used to

Implementation Science