Realist synthesis is an increasingly popular approach to the review and synthesis of evidence, which focuses on understanding the mechanisms by which an intervention works (or not). There are few published examples of realist synthesis. This paper therefore fills a gap by describing, in detail, the process used for a realist review and synthesis to answer the question ‘what interventions and strategies are effective in enabling evidence-informed healthcare?’ The strengths and challenges of conducting realist review are also considered.

Over time there has been a shift, at least in the rhetoric, from a pipeline conceptualisation of knowledge implementation, to one that recognises the potential of more collaboration, co-productive approaches to knowledge production and use. In this editorial, which is grounded in our research and collective experience, we highlight both the potential and challenge with collaboration and co-production. This includes issues about stakeholder engagement, governance arrangements, and capacity and capability for working in a coproductive way. Finally, we reflect on the fact that this approach is not a panacea, but is accompanied by some philosophical and practical challenges.

Introduction: Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for the management of low back pain (LBP) that contain consistent messages, large evidence-practice gaps in primary care remain. Objectives: To perform a systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies that have explored primary care clinicians’ perceptions and beliefs about guidelines for LBP, including perceived enablers and barriers to guideline adherence. Methods: Studies investigating perceptions and beliefs about LBP guidelines were included if participants were primary care clinicians and qualitative methods had been used for both data collection and analysis. We searched major databases up to July 2014. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, extracted data, appraised method quality using the CASP checklist, conducted thematic analysis, and synthesized the results in narrative format. Results: Seventeen studies, with a total of 705 participants, were included. We identified 3 key emergent themes and 8 subthemes: (1) guideline implementation and adherence beliefs and perceptions; (2) maintaining the patient-clinician relationship with imaging referrals; and (3) barriers to guideline implementation. Clinicians believed that guidelines were categorical, prescriptive, and constrained professional practice; however, popular clinical practices superseded the guidelines. Imaging referrals were used to manage consultations and to obtain definitive diagnoses. Clinicians’ perceptions reflected a lack of content knowledge and understanding of how guidelines are developed. Discussion: Addressing misconceptions and other barriers to uptake of evidence-based guidelines for managing LBP is needed to improve knowledge transfer and close the evidence-practice gap in the treatment of this common condition.

To investigate the role of medical emergency teams in end-of-life care planning. One month prospective audit of medical emergency team calls. Seven university-affiliated hospitals in Australia, Canada, and Sweden. Five hundred eighteen patients who received a medical emergency team call over 1 month. None. There were 652 medical emergency team calls in 518 patients, with multiple calls in 99 (19.1%) patients. There were 161 (31.1%) patients with limitations of medical therapy during the study period. The limitation of medical therapy was instituted in 105 (20.3%) and 56 (10.8%) patients before and after the medical emergency team call, respectively. In 78 patients who died with a limitation of medical therapy in place, the last medical emergency team review was on the day of death in 29.5% of patients, and within 2 days in another 28.2%. Compared with patients who did not have a limitation of medical therapy, those with a limitation of medical therapy were older (80 vs. 66 yrs; p < .001), less likely to be male (44.1% vs. 55.7%; p = .014), more likely to be medical admissions (70.8% vs. 51.3%; p < .001), and less likely to be admitted from home (74.5% vs. 92.2%, p < .001). In addition, those with a limitation of medical therapy were less likely to be discharged home (22.4% vs. 63.6%; p < .001) and more likely to die in hospital (48.4% vs. 12.3%; p < .001). There was a trend for increased likelihood of calls associated with limitations of medical therapy to occur out of hours (51.0% vs. 43.8%, p = .089). Issues around end-of-life care and limitations of medical therapy arose in approximately one-third of calls, suggesting a mismatch between patient needs for end-of-life care and resources at participating hospitals. These calls frequently occur in elderly medical patients and out of hours. Many such patients do not return home, and half die in hospital. There is a need for improved advanced care planning in our hospitals, and to confirm our findings in other organizations.

To compare protocol-directed sedation management with traditional non-protocol-directed practice in mechanically ventilated patients. Randomized, controlled trial. General intensive care unit (24 beds) in an Australian metropolitan teaching hospital. Adult, mechanically ventilated patients (n = 312). Patients were randomly assigned to receive sedation directed by formal guidelines (protocol group, n = 153) or usual local clinical practice (control, n = 159). The median (95% confidence interval) duration of ventilation was 79 hrs (56-93 hrs) for patients in the protocol group compared with 58 hrs (44-78 hrs) for patients who received control care (p = .20). Lengths of stay (median [range]) in the intensive care unit (94 [2-1106] hrs vs. 88 (14-962) hrs, p = .58) and hospital (13 [1-113] days vs. 13 (1-365) days, p = .97) were similar, as were the proportions of subjects receiving a tracheostomy (17% vs. 15%, p = .64) or undergoing unplanned self-extubation (1.3% vs. 0.6%, p = .61). Death in the intensive care unit occurred in 32 (21%) patients in the protocol group and 32 (20%) control subjects (p = .89), with a similar overall proportion of deaths in hospital (25% vs. 22%, p = .51). A Cox proportional hazards model, after adjustment for age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, diagnostic category, and doses of commonly used drugs, estimated that protocol sedation management was associated with a 22% decrease (95% confidence interval 40% decrease to 2% increase, p = .07) in the occurrence of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation. This randomized trial provided no evidence of a substantial reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation or length of stay, in either the intensive care unit or the hospital, with the use of protocol-directed sedation compared with usual local management. Qualified high-intensity nurse staffing and routine Australian intensive care unit nursing responsibility for many aspects of ventilatory practice may explain the contrast between these findings and some recent North American studies.

Patient participation is a way for patients to engage in their nursing care. In view of the possible link between patient participation and safety, there is a need for an updated review to assess patient participation in nursing care. To investigate patients' and nurses' perceptions of and behaviours towards patient participation in nursing care in the context of hospital medical wards. Integrative review. Three search strategies were employed in August 2013; a computerised database search of Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, Medline and PsychINFO; reference lists were hand-searched; and forward citation searching was executed. After reviewing the studies, extracting study data and completing summary tables the methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Assessment Tool by two reviewers. Reviewers met then to discuss discrepancies as well as the overall strengths and limitations of the studies. Discrepancies were overcome through consensus or a third reviewer adjudicated the issue. Within and across study analysis and synthesis of the findings sections was undertaken using thematic synthesis. Eight studies met inclusion criteria. Four themes were identified - enacting participation, challenges to participation, promoting participation and types of participation. Most studies included were conducted in Europe. The majority of studies used qualitative methodologies, with all studies sampling patients; nurses were included in three studies. Data were largely collected using self-reported perceptions; two studies included observational data. Methodological issues included a lack of reflexivity, un-validated data collection tools, sampling issues and low response rates. On medical wards, patients and nurses desire, perceive or enact patient participation passively. Challenging factors for patient participation include patients' willingness, nurses' approach and confusion around expectations and roles. Information-sharing was identified as an activity that promotes patient participation, suggesting nurses encourage active communication with patients in practice. Involving patients in assessment and care planning may also enhance patient participation. For education, enhancing nurses' understanding of the attributes of patient participation, as well as patient-centred care approaches may be beneficial for medical ward nurses. From here, researchers need to examine ways to overcome the barriers to patient participation; further nurse participants and observational data is required on medical wards.