Abstract:S cientific discovery over the past 30 years has provided neurologic physical therapists with a wealth of knowledge in many areas, including the effects of neuroplasticity, technology, measurement, and interventions that will help our patients achieve the best outcomes. Although the amount and quality of this literature continues to grow at a rapid pace, evidence suggests that 17 years or more could pass before the evidence generated today is used in practice.1 Studies that investigated the use of evidence-based practice in neurologic physical therapy (PT) confirm this finding, as most demonstrate minimal to partial use of evidence to guide treatment decisions.2−5 The 17-year time lag for the translation of evidence to practice could cause harm to our patients and be costly to society,6 and must be shortened. Each of us, including clinicians, administrators, policy makers, scientists, and patients, has a role in improving practice and decreasing this time lag. Although Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon.com, was talking about retail business when he stated “What’s very dangerous is not to evolve,”7 these words apply equally well to our profession. Now, more than ever, PT must evolve to systematically implement evidence-based practices, assess outcomes of these practices, and continually refine how we deliver care. This will not only ensure that our patients receive maximum benefit from our services, but it will also demonstrate the value of physical therapy. This is particularly important as changes to reimbursement policies may facilitate a transition to value-based care.8 Given the urgent need to implement evidence into practice and the complexity of changing clinical practice, the field of knowledge translation (KT) is rapidly growing. Knowledge translation has drawn from a number of different areas including psychology, education, and quality improvement (QI). As a result, over 100 terms have been identified as equivalent or closely related to KT.9 The Canadian Institutes of Health Research, a federal health research funding agency in Canada, has been a leader in the area of KT. They define KT as “a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically-sound application of knowledge to improve the health of Canadians, provide more effective health services and products and strengthen the health care system. This process takes place within a complex system of interactions between researchers and knowledge users which may vary in intensity, complexity and level of engagement depending on the nature of the research and the findings as well as the needs of the particular knowledge user.”10 Other terms commonly used to describe KT include communication, diffusion of innovation, knowledge management, and continuing education. Implementation science contributes to the field of KT, as it is the “scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices into routine practice, and, hence, to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services.”11 A helpful way to think about the various terms and levels of engagement in KT is to consider the KT process as a hierarchy, including the following categories: (1) a very passive approach, “letting it happen,” where research findings are published (diffusion); (2) providing aids such as toolkits to facilitate “helping it happen” (dissemination); and (3)

How do the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Technology Transfer Centers Decide What Evidence-Based Practices to Disseminate and Determine How to Do So? A Cross-Sectional Study of a National Network

Continuous Quality Improvement in the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Technology Transfer Center Network: A Process Evaluation

Supporting Implementation Through Online Learning Communities: Lessons Learned From a National Training and Technical Assistance Network

Strengthening the Science and Practice of Implementation Support: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Training and Technical Assistance Centers

Digital Presence of a Research Center as a Research Dissemination Platform: Reach and Resources

Technical Assistance for Systemic Change: Lessons Learned From a National Technical Assistance Center

A Peer-to-Peer Collaborative Learning Approach for the Implementation of Evidence-Informed Interventions to Improve HIV-Related Health Outcomes

A mixed-methods study of system-level sustainability of evidence-based practices in 12 large-scale implementation initiatives

Barriers and Facilitators to Adopting a Systematic, Proactive, Evidence-Informed Technical Assistance System

Organizational Factors Influencing Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices for Integrated Treatment in Behavioral Health Agencies

Increasing the Writing Capacity and Dissemination of Evaluation Findings Among US Public Health Practitioners Funded to Improve Cardiovascular Health

Scaling up Evidence-Based Interventions in US Public Systems to Prevent Behavioral Health Problems: Challenges and Opportunities

Advancing the Science and Practice of Training and Technical Assistance to Improve the Equitable Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices

The Role of Cooperative Extension in Delivering Training and Technical Assistance to Support Evidence-Based Behavioral Health Practices in Rural Communities

Adapting evidence-based interventions using a common theory, practices, and principles

Testing the implementation and sustainment facilitation (ISF) strategy as an effective adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) strategy: study protocol for a cluster randomized trial

Knowledge Translation: The Catalyst for Innovation of Neurologic Physical Therapy.

Adapting evidence-based behavioral interventions for new settings and target populations

Why, what, and how: Training community clinicians on evidence-based practice for youth mental health.

Remote Evidence-Based Programs for Health Promotion to Support Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Mixed Methods Outcome Evaluation

Embracing Complexity: Developing a Framework for Evaluating a Multi-Faceted Training and Technical Assistance System