Reversing the pipeline? Implementing public health evidence-based guidance in english local government.

Lou Atkins, Michael P Kelly, Clare Littleford, Gillian Leng, Susan Michie
Author Information
  1. Lou Atkins: Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK. l.atkins@ucl.ac.uk.
  2. Michael P Kelly: Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK.
  3. Clare Littleford: Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
  4. Gillian Leng: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 10 Spring Gardens, London, SW1A 2BU, UK.
  5. Susan Michie: Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the UK, responsibility for many public health functions was transferred in 2013 from the National Health Service (NHS) to local government; a very different political context and one without the NHS history of policy and practice being informed by evidence-based guidelines. A problem this move presented was whether evidence-based guidelines would be seen as relevant, useful and implementable within local government. This study investigates three aspects of implementing national evidence-based recommendations for public health within a local government context: influences on implementation, how useful guidelines are perceived to be and whether the linear evidence-guidelines-practice model is considered relevant.
METHODS: Thirty-one councillors, public health directors and deputy directors and officers and other local government employees were interviewed about their experiences implementing evidence-based guidelines. Interviews were informed and analysed using a theoretical model of behaviour (COM-B; Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour).
RESULTS: Contextual issues such as budget, capacity and political influence were important influences on implementation. Guidelines were perceived to be of limited use, with concerns expressed about recommendations being presented in the abstract, lacking specificity and not addressing the complexity of situations or local variations. Local evidence was seen as the best starting point, rather than evidence-based guidance produced by the traditional linear 'evidence-guidelines-practice' model. Local evidence was used to not only provide context for recommendations but also replace recommendations when they conflicted with local evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: Local government users do not necessarily consider national guidelines to be fit for purpose at local level, with the consequence that local evidence tends to trump evidence-based guidelines. There is thus a tension between the traditional model of guideline development and the needs of public health decision-makers and practitioners working in local government. This tension needs to be addressed to facilitate implementation. One way this might be achieved, and participants supported this approach, would be to reverse or re-engineer the traditional pipeline of guideline development by starting with local need and examples of effective local practice rather than starting with evidence of effectiveness synthesised from the international scientific literature. Alternatively, and perhaps in addition, training about the relevance of research evidence should become a routine for local government staff and councillors.

Keywords

References

  1. Evid Based Med. 2011 Aug;16(4):97-9 [PMID: 21693456]
  2. BMJ Open. 2015 Apr 02;5(4):e007053 [PMID: 25838508]
  3. J Public Health (Oxf). 2005 Jun;27(2):215-21 [PMID: 15820994]
  4. Ann Fam Med. 2013 Mar-Apr;11(2):130-6 [PMID: 23508599]
  5. Eur J Public Health. 2017 May 1;27(suppl_2):118-123 [PMID: 26163470]
  6. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006 Jul-Aug;25(4):969-78 [PMID: 16835176]
  7. Nurse Res. 2012 Nov 22;20(2):45 [PMID: 27712170]
  8. Implement Sci. 2014 May 23;9:60 [PMID: 24886520]
  9. Prev Chronic Dis. 2012;9:E116 [PMID: 22721501]
  10. BMJ. 2014 Jun 13;348:g3725 [PMID: 24927763]
  11. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Oct;58(10):811-6 [PMID: 15365104]
  12. Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88 [PMID: 16204405]
  13. PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e21704 [PMID: 21818262]
  14. BMJ. 2016 Mar 29;352:i1662 [PMID: 27026052]
  15. Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 23;6:42 [PMID: 21513547]
  16. Eur J Public Health. 2014 Dec;24(6):1041-7 [PMID: 24681818]
  17. Implement Sci. 2015 Jun 30;10:93 [PMID: 26122560]
  18. Soc Sci Med. 2010 Sep;71(6):1056-62 [PMID: 20678836]
  19. Implement Sci. 2014 Dec 14;9:188 [PMID: 25496505]
  20. Soc Theory Health. 2012 Feb;10(1):1-19 [PMID: 23226973]

MeSH Term

Adult
Attitude of Health Personnel
England
Evidence-Based Medicine
Female
Health Personnel
Humans
Local Government
Male
Middle Aged
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Public Health Administration
State Medicine

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0localgovernmentevidence-basedguidelineshealthevidencepublicrecommendationsmodelLocalimplementationstartingtraditionalNHSpoliticalcontextpracticeinformedpresentedwhetherseenrelevantusefulwithinimplementingnationalinfluencesperceivedlinearcouncillorsdirectorsratherguidancetensionguidelinedevelopmentneedsBACKGROUND:UKresponsibilitymanyfunctionstransferred2013NationalHealthServicedifferentonewithouthistorypolicyproblemmoveimplementablestudyinvestigatesthreeaspectscontext:evidence-guidelines-practiceconsideredMETHODS:Thirty-onedeputyofficersemployeesinterviewedexperiencesInterviewsanalysedusingtheoreticalbehaviourCOM-BCapabilityOpportunityMotivation-BehaviourRESULTS:ContextualissuesbudgetcapacityinfluenceimportantGuidelineslimiteduseconcernsexpressedabstractlackingspecificityaddressingcomplexitysituationsvariationsbestpointproduced'evidence-guidelines-practice'usedprovidealsoreplaceconflictedCONCLUSIONS:usersnecessarilyconsiderfitpurposelevelconsequencetendstrumpthusdecision-makerspractitionersworkingaddressedfacilitateOnewaymightachievedparticipantssupportedapproachreversere-engineerpipelineneedexampleseffectiveeffectivenesssynthesisedinternationalscientificliteratureAlternativelyperhapsadditiontrainingrelevanceresearchbecomeroutinestaffReversingpipeline?ImplementingenglishKnowledgetransferNICEPublic

Similar Articles

Cited By (23)