Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence (FIRE): an international cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate two models of facilitation informed by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework.

Background: Health care practice needs to be underpinned by high quality research evidence, so that the best possible care can be delivered. However, evidence from research is not always utilised in practice. This study used the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework as its theoretical underpinning to test whether two different approaches to facilitating implementation could affect the use of research evidence in practice.

A realist process evaluation within the Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence (FIRE) cluster randomised controlled international trial: an exemplar.

Background: Facilitation is a promising implementation intervention, which requires theory-informed evaluation. This paper presents an exemplar of a multi-country realist process evaluation that was embedded in the first international randomised controlled trial evaluating two types of facilitation for implementing urinary continence care recommendations. We aimed to uncover what worked (and did not work), for whom, how, why and in what circumstances during the process of implementing the facilitation interventions in practice.

Designing and implementing two facilitation interventions within the 'Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence (FIRE)' study: a qualitative analysis from an external facilitators' perspective.

Background: The 'Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence' study found no significant differences between sites that received two types of facilitation support and those that did not on the primary outcome of documented compliance with guideline recommendations. Process evaluation highlighted factors that influenced local, internal facilitators' ability to enact the roles as envisaged. In this paper, the external facilitators responsible for designing and delivering the two types of facilitation intervention analyse why the interventions proved difficult to implement as expected, including the challenge of balancing fidelity and adaptation.

A Kaleidoscope of Hope: Exploring Experiences of Hope Among Service Users and Informal Carers in Health Care Contexts.

Background: There is a large and diverse literature on the concept of hope in health care. This literature covers a broad spectrum of perspectives, from philosophical, conceptual, and theoretical analysis through to attempts at measuring the concept of hope with differing health care users.

Aims: To explore the concept of hope through the secondary analysis of existing data sets, with the intention of understanding hope in the context of person-centeredness.

FIRE (Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence): a study protocol.

Background: Research evidence underpins best practice, but is not always used in healthcare. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework suggests that the nature of evidence, the context in which it is used, and whether those trying to use evidence are helped (or facilitated) affect the use of evidence. Urinary incontinence has a major effect on quality of life of older people, has a high prevalence, and is a key priority within European health and social care policy.