Evidence synthesis activities of a hospital evidence‐based practice center and impact on hospital decision making

• Published in: Journal of hospital medicine 2016-03, Vol.11 (3), p.185-192
• Main Authors: Jayakumar, Kishore L., Lavenberg, Julia A., Mitchell, Matthew D., Doshi, Jalpa A., Leas, Brian, Goldmann, David R., Williams, Kendal, Brennan, Patrick J., Umscheid, Craig A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Decision Making, Organizational; Evidence-Based Practice - methods; Hospital Administration; Humans; Information Dissemination - methods; Research Report; Surveys and Questionnaires; United States
• ISSN: 1553-5592; 1553-5606
• DOI: 10.1002/jhm.2498

BACKGROUND Hospital evidence‐based practice centers (EPCs) synthesize and disseminate evidence locally, but their impact on institutional decision making is unclear. OBJECTIVE To assess the evidence synthesis activities and impact of a hospital EPC serving a large academic healthcare system. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Descriptive analysis of the EPC's database of rapid systematic reviews since EPC inception (July 2006–June 2014), and survey of report requestors from the EPC's last 4 fiscal years. MEASUREMENTS Descriptive analyses examined requestor and report characteristics; questionnaire examined report usability, impact, and requestor satisfaction (higher scores on 5‐point Likert scales reflected greater agreement). RESULTS The EPC completed 249 evidence reviews since inception. The most common requestors were clinical departments (29%, n = 72), chief medical officers (19%, n = 47), and purchasing committees (14%, n = 35). The most common technologies reviewed were drugs (24%, n = 60), devices (19%, n = 48), and care processes (12%, n = 31). Mean report completion time was 70 days. Thirty reports (12%) informed computerized decision support interventions. More than half of reports (56%, n = 139) were completed in the last 4 fiscal years for 65 requestors. Of the 64 eligible participants, 46 responded (72%). Requestors were satisfied with the report (mean = 4.4), and agreed it was delivered promptly (mean = 4.4), answered the questions posed (mean = 4.3), and informed their final decision (mean = 4.1). CONCLUSIONS This is the first examination of evidence synthesis activities by a hospital EPC in the United States. Our findings suggest hospital EPCs can efficiently synthesize and disseminate evidence addressing a range of clinical topics for diverse stakeholders, and can influence local decision making. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:185–192. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine