Integrating quality improvement, evidence-based practice, and knowledge translation into a health Sciences masters’ programme: a mixed methods study

TL;DR

This study explores how a new teaching module helps health science master's students apply quality improvement, evidence-based practice, and knowledge translation to improve health services.

Contribution

The study introduces and evaluates a novel integrated teaching module combining quality improvement, evidence-based practice, and knowledge translation for health sciences education.

Findings

Students showed significant improvements in seven key learning outcomes after the module.

Three key themes emerged from focus groups: project consultation, evidence-based improvement, and qualification for implementation work.

A supervised group project exam is recommended as an effective assessment method.

Abstract

In recent years, the emphasis on quality improvement (QI), evidence-based practice (EBP), and knowledge translation (KT) in the education of health professionals has increased. Efforts have been made to identify commonalities between quality improvement and implementation science. However, the development of curricula that encompass these approaches remains poorly understood. Consequently, this study examines the implementation of a novel teaching module in quality improvement and evidence-based practice, designed for health sciences master’s students. The objective was to explore how students apply a combination of QI, EBP, and KT principles to enhance health services through clinically relevant, project-based assessments.

The study utilised a mixed-methods approach. A survey assessed students’ self-perceived skills in quality improvement and the implementation of evidence-based practice. Of the 311 students enrolled, 163 (52%) participated in the pre-evaluation and 123 (39%) participated in the post-evaluation. Four focus group interviews with 24 students explored reflections on their learning process and the knowledge application within their respective professional fields. Project plans from 14 exam groups explored reflections on implementation. The qualitative data was analysed according to the principles of descriptive analysis.

Survey data indicated statistically significant improvements in seven student-reported learning outcomes from pre- to post-evaluation, specifically addressing issues such as setting up a literature search strategy and identifying relevant barriers and facilitators in planning an improvement project (p < 0.001). Learning outcomes were assessed as either confident or not confident. Focus groups and textual analysis identified three themes: teaching modelled as project consultation, improving with evidence, and qualifying for implementation work. Combined survey and qualitative data indicated that a supervised project exam is recommended. Integrating QI, EBP, and KT is advisable, but clarification of their integration is needed. Additionally, planning an improvement project for implementation in an existing organization is recommended as a framework for a project exam.

The study supports a module for teaching quality improvement and implementation science within an integrated course for master’s students. Additionally, the study demonstrated the usefulness of a supervised continuous group examination task. Teachers adopting this course design should offer students a clear, robust, and explicit model for improving health services.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-025-07838-9.