Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Critically Appraised Topics (CATs) are brief reviews of the best evidence that aim to generate a clinical bottom line for implementation in clinical practice. Potential topics are brought by clinicians to the CAT group, questions are defined and CAT teams (clinicians and researchers) are established. Structured literature searches are conducted and evidence is appraised and synthesized. CATs are disseminated locally to healthcare practitioners, managers and commissioners to inform decision-making. It can take months to produce a CAT as these activities fit around clinical workloads.
Objectives: We wanted to see if it was feasible to develop CATs in a one-day workshop. Our aims were to speed up CAT development, highlight work of the group and engage new local clinicians by teaching new skills.
Methods: Topics were chosen before the workshop based on interests of attendees and availability of evidence. Four specific CAT questions were discussed and refined within each group. Participants had opportunity to learn searching and critical appraisal skills. Facilitators from the CAT group helped to interpret research results and generate the clinical bottom line. We gave advice on how to disseminate and implement CATs when back in clinical practice. Structured searches were conducted after the workshop to evaluate the one-day CATs.
Results: In the workshop, we found and appraised at least one research paper, often a systematic review, relating to each CAT. There was insufficient good quality evidence to instigate a change in clinical practice and gaps were highlighted in the evidence, particularly for early mobilisation after total knee replacement and steroid injections for plantar fasciitis.
Conclusions: It seems feasible to develop a CAT in a one-day workshop for simple intervention questions. We will discuss the validity and limitations of this approach and how it can be used to support training clinicians and implementation of EBM.
Objectives: We wanted to see if it was feasible to develop CATs in a one-day workshop. Our aims were to speed up CAT development, highlight work of the group and engage new local clinicians by teaching new skills.
Methods: Topics were chosen before the workshop based on interests of attendees and availability of evidence. Four specific CAT questions were discussed and refined within each group. Participants had opportunity to learn searching and critical appraisal skills. Facilitators from the CAT group helped to interpret research results and generate the clinical bottom line. We gave advice on how to disseminate and implement CATs when back in clinical practice. Structured searches were conducted after the workshop to evaluate the one-day CATs.
Results: In the workshop, we found and appraised at least one research paper, often a systematic review, relating to each CAT. There was insufficient good quality evidence to instigate a change in clinical practice and gaps were highlighted in the evidence, particularly for early mobilisation after total knee replacement and steroid injections for plantar fasciitis.
Conclusions: It seems feasible to develop a CAT in a one-day workshop for simple intervention questions. We will discuss the validity and limitations of this approach and how it can be used to support training clinicians and implementation of EBM.