Introduction
Methods
Registration
Search strategy
Process | [implementation$ or dissemination$ or roll-out or knowledge translation or knowledge transfer] AND |
Type of change | [intervention$ or treatment plan$ or care plan or pathway$] AND |
Population/setting | [health care or health care service$ or health care utilization or health care delivery or hospital services or health services research or clinical service$ or hospital program$ or tertiary service or hospital] AND |
Mechanisms | [facilitat$ or barrier$ or challenges or barrier analysis or process analysis or enabl$ or change agent] AND |
Intervention type | [psychological or psychosocial or psychology] |
Eligibility criteria
1. Types of studies | Quantitative or qualitative original studies published in full including: |
- Interviews/focus groups | |
- Surveys/questionnaires | |
Exclusions: Review papers, editorials, commentary/discussion papers, papers published in languages other than English, conference posters or oral presentations not available in full text, book chapters. | |
2. Study settings | Hospital settings including: |
- Inpatient | |
- Outpatient hospital settings where implementation is based in the hospital context | |
- Mixed context studies where at least one setting is hospital-based (and data is reported for staff in that setting) | |
Exclusions: community-based, population-based, school-based, prison-based, outreach studies, nursing homes. | |
3. Population | Hospital staff of any type including: |
- Health care providers (doctors, nurses, allied health professionals), IT, managers, administrators | |
Exclusions: no staff who were working in the hospital at the time of implementation were excluded. Any papers that collected data from staff who were not hospital-based were excluded based on criterion 2, study setting. For example, studies based in community health settings with community health workers were excluded based on setting. However, if a hospital study involved both clinical and community staff in a hospital-based implementation, all staff involved in the implementation were included. | |
4. Interventions | The intervention focused on direct patient care outcomes including: |
- Direct patient interventions such as therapy or behavioral change interventions | |
- Interventions with direct patient benefit, e.g., hygienic interventions, staff behavioral or communication based interventions designed to improve patient outcomes | |
Exclusions: medical record management or IT interventions, interventions focused on administration outcomes, e.g., rostering change interventions. | |
5. Formal collection of data about implementation processes | The study contains formal, objectively collected data (quantitative or qualitative) from staff on barriers and facilitators to implementation (at any stage: pre, post, or during the process) including: |
- Interviews/focus groups with staff participants where questions specifically asked about the implementation | |
- Surveys/questionnaires with staff participants on barriers to the implementation | |
Exclusions: any papers that did not directly assess the implementation process, as well as any studies that did not provide any formal data (as specified above) from staff participants about the implementation process. Therefore all studies that assessed the intervention only were excluded, as well as studies which provided only descriptive or anecdotal information about the implementation. |
Study selection process
Data extraction and analysis of included articles
Quality assessment
Results
Included studies
Study characteristics
Study origin
Study designs
Participants
Methods
Types of implementation
Health state | Included studies |
---|---|
Mental illness | 7 |
Pregnancy/neonatal | 7 |
General population | 6 |
Oncology | 5 |
ED | 4 |
HIV | 3 |
Pediatric | 2 |
Palliative | 2 |
Geriatric care | 2 |
ICU | 1 |
Bereaved parents | 1 |
Congenital heart failure | 1 |
Speciality areas (orthopedics, cardiology, urology, women’s health, general surgery, neurosurgery) | 1 |
Traumatic injury | 1 |
Intervention approach | Included studies |
---|---|
Supportive or behavior change intervention/clinic | 16 |
Screening/assessment tool/process | 10 |
Clinical or care pathway/guidelines | 7 |
Medical procedure | 3 |
Safety and quality | 3 |
Breast feeding/infant care | 2 |
Reporting system | 1 |
Patient decision aids | 1 |
Explicit use of conceptual theory or framework
Reporting of barriers and facilitators
Study quality
Quality checklist criteria | Included studies that met this criteria (rating yes) |
---|---|
Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) | (N = 37) |
1. Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research? | 35/37 |
2. Is a qualitative methodology appropriate? | 37/37 |
3. Was the research design appropriate to address the aims of the research? | 33/37 |
4. Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research? | 30/37 |
5. Was the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue? | 32/37 |
6. Has the relationship between researcher and participants been adequately considered? | 2/37 |
7. Have ethical issues been taken into consideration? | 34/37 |
8. Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous? | 31/37 |
9. Is there a clear statement of findings? | 34/37 |
10. How valuable is the research? (no rating) | Rating not indicated for this item |
Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) | (N = 3) |
Are there clear qualitative and quantitative research questions (or objectives), or a clear mixed methods question (or objective)? | 3/3 |
Do the collected data allow address the research question (objective)? E.g., consider whether the follow-up period is long enough for the outcome to occur (for longitudinal studies or study components). | 2/3 |
1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)? | 2/3 |
1.2. Is the process for analyzing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)? | 1/3 |
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected? | 2/3 |
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants? | 0/3 |
4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)? | 1/3 |
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy? | 1/3 |
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)? | 1/3 |
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)? | 1/3 |
5.1. Is the mixed methods research design relevant to address the qualitative and quantitative research questions (or objectives), or the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the mixed methods question (or objective)? | 3/3 |
5.2. Is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data (or results) relevant to address the research question (objective)? | 2/3 |
5.3. Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this integration, e.g., the divergence of qualitative and quantitative data (or results) in a triangulation design? | 1/3 |
Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT; Quantitative descriptive) | (N = 3) |
Are there clear qualitative and quantitative research questions (or objectives), or a clear mixed methods question (or objective)? | 3/3 |
Do the collected data allow address the research question (objective)? E.g., consider whether the follow-up period is long enough for the outcome to occur (for longitudinal studies or study components). | 3/3 |
4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)? | 3/3 |
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy? | 2/3 |
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)? | 2/3 |
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)? | 2/3 |
Key findings of barriers and facilitators to implementation
Domain | Sub-domain | Brief description | Number of included studies citing barriers or facilitators in this domain |
---|---|---|---|
System | |||
Environmental context | IT, trial staff, time, workload, workflow, competing trials, space, movement and staff turnover | The physical, structural resources of the context, along with its processes and personal resources | 37 |
Culture | Attitude to change (readiness and agents), commitment and motivation, flexibility of roles/trust, champions/role models | The system culture, beliefs and behaviors in relation to change and staffing roles | 28 |
Communication processes | Processes within the context | The processes of conveying information within the system, in terms of both online and in-person methods | 25 |
External requirements | Reporting, standards, guidelines | Any external pressures or expectations that impact on the deliverables of the system | 4 |
Staff | |||
Staff commitment and attitudes | Perceived validity/need, ownership, perceived efficiency, perceived safety, belief in change/readiness for change | The micro-level beliefs, attitudes and behaviors toward change in general, and the intervention specifically | 33 |
Understanding/awareness | Of the goals of the intervention, and of the processes/mechanics | Understanding of the aims and methodology of the intervention | 22 |
Role identity | Flexibility, responsibility | Beliefs and attitudes towards one’s work role and responsibilities | 13 |
Skills, ability, confidence | To engage patients and overcome patient barriers, to carry out the intervention, to manage stress/competing priorities | Staff sense of their capacity to carry out the tasks of the intervention, while managing the barriers posed by the target population and their work environment | 30 |
Intervention | |||
Ease of integration | Complexity, cost and resources required, flexibility (to respond to patient, staff and system), acceptability/suitability to system, staff and patients; fit for context | How well the intervention “fits” with the current system, resources and needs of the population and context, as well as its ability to adapt and respond when changes are needed | 30 |
Face validity/evidence base | Theory and evidence | The extent to which the intervention is grounded in solid evidence regarding a known issue, and how effective it looks to be in terms of meeting its aims | 12 |
Safety/legal/ethical concerns | Patient or staff safety; medico-legal concerns | How well an intervention addresses important issues of safety and legality to protect staff and patients | 6 |
Supportive components | Education/training provided, marketing/awareness, audit/feedback, involvement of end users | The components of the intervention which work to support and facilitate the changes necessary | 38 |
Factor | Illustrative quotes |
---|---|
System | |
Environmental context | Workload: “The difficulty is not actually doing the observation, it’s …having the time to go and write it down, and then talk to somebody about it” (Ward co-ordinator) [27] Availability: “It’s not always easy depending on the staffing levels on the ward. Obviously, if you’ve got a lot off sick or on annual leave or whatever, the numbers are short, it’s not always possible….”(Ward co-ordinator) [27] Burden falls on small number of staff: “I tried to leave [POS] questionnaires for people in the diary and it just didn’t work. I actually came in [on days off] to do it, because I rang up to see if anyone had bothered and they hadn’t” [31] Need for institution level support: “There needs to be explicit support from the institution that spending time on these issues is time well spent. That it’s valued and supported, … and that it is a priority (Psychiatrist)” [6] Physical space: “There are too many people for too little space, especially for people who are only going to watch.” [41] Workflow systems: “[We] need to address the hospital management so that they can revise the system of allocating…who is the responsible team even on the weekend. (Physician)” [5] IT: “(we need the)…ability to track referrals and see whether the patient actually saw the psycho-oncologist because it doesn’t always happen…and to have that in some sort of standardized, accessible way, ideally as part of the medical record.” (Medical oncologist) [6] System level: “support should be at the system level in terms of how it’s integrated, in routine documentation, in IT systems and in quality review.” (Nurse clinician-researcher) [6] |
Culture | Attitude toward change: “Sometimes it seems a very big mountain’; it’s going to take a while to change”(Focus Group) [37] System level commitment: “My coworkers are flexible and even double their workload so you can talk with the parents in peace, it’s considered such an important thing” [40] Role flexibility: “Doctors have their title and so they think that no one else knows anything. . . . They are going to be hostile [towards us]” [41] Staff role: “I don’t mind [having the role of ward coordinator]. I’m the infection control link nurse, so I see it as part of that role really, hand hygiene…” (Ward coordinator) [27] Champions: “I did find sometimes [as a consequence of delivering the intervention], people in groups was like against me [.. .] they try to find another problem of me and go talk to the manager regarding that... because I pick them up on their problem they’re going to talk to the manager” (Ward coordinator) [27] |
Communication processes | Lack of interdepartmental communication: “Developing this program requires so much collaboration between so many different departments–I don’t know if it happens all the time or all that easily.… it’s tough to have a communication system between departments and across systems–e-mail and access to patient information is not always smooth” [67] Culture of open communication: “We have a new administration that promotes a very openness in communication, and is very quick to recognize systems problems and not people problems, so to speak” [44] |
External requirements | “If you have no accreditation then you don’t get reimbursed and you don’t stay open.” [44] “So we wrote the policy to be a mandatory directive so that those people at the ground level had the topdown support. To be able to say we have been told we have to do this, so you (hospital management) need to support us” (Focus group) [37] “And if… you’ve got senior buy-in to say ‘this is an expectation of our cancer services… if you provide the support underneath that and the resourcing of the implementation to a certain degree, you’re kind of covering both ends” (Nurse) [6] |
Staff | |
Staff commitment and attitudes | Attitude toward the intervention: “the cardiologists say they don’t need it, they know what to do with these patients” [45] Beliefs regarding need for intervention: “if we’re able to communicate the difference that this has the potential to make to women in their care, they’re far more likely to champion it…” [28] Motivation: “They may feel that they’re losing control or that they’re being forced to do something” [45] “I’m really very passionate about this [the intervention] that we’re doing, so I’m really striving to do it” (Ward coordinator) [27] Ownership:“…getting engagement with psychosocial services and the nursing staff… is really important because the bottom line is that at the end of the day they’re going to implement it” (Nurse) [6] |
Understanding/awareness | “I still feel that there’s a view out there that it’s…a fanatical way of operating” (Focus Group) [37] |
Role identity | “(there is) …a lack of clarity about who’s role it is, who the decision maker is… It’s not that uncommon that someone says ‘well that’s my role’ and everyone in the rest of the team goes ‘is it?’” (Nurse) [6] “I think it’s everybody’s responsibility you know. . .Just getting everybody involved rather than a few motivated members of the team who are interested in it” (Nurse) [47] |
Skills, ability, confidence | Confidence: “I do not have the confidence to work with a doctor.” (Traditional Midwife) [41] Skill: “I felt that if I disturbed something while I was talking to them, I don’t have the psychological back up for them” [31]. Patient-related barriers: “some of the patients are so very rude. Angry and rude. You won’t even be able to approach the to ask them questions” [35] Time management: “I’ve felt stressed in terms of, I’ve got to get it done and, you know, the clock’s ticking and I’ve got other things to do” (Ward coordinator) [27] Competing demands: “Social workers have too many clients to add positive prevention to their caseloads. The workload was unmanageable” [32] |
Intervention | |
Ease of integration | Multiple stages of intervention: “me in the unit telling them “there’s a counselor that you have to come and see tomorrow”, there’s no way he’s coming back” [35] Simplicity: “Just looking at the ten steps... it is achievable” [37] Resources and workload: “We were getting a large number of phone calls…and it was easier, frankly, to do what we’ve been doing …and not have to put up with numerous calls” [45] “It became time consuming, with the end result being the same” [45] Suitability and fit“. . . it’s a part of your routine already so I don’t find it difficult, it’s just finding ways of how to do it, I mean it’s not too difficult” [49] Acceptability to staff: “Clinical pathways are used in lots of different areas and the ease at which it is to implement these things is a challenge and… (there is a) degree of fatigue around different things that get implemented… particularly once you get down to department level” (Nurse) [6] Fit for patient populations: “we focus a great deal on changing clinicians’ expectations and skills, but I don’t think we’ve even tackled too closely an understanding of what’s needed in order to make services more acceptable to patients.” (Psychiatrist) [6] |
Face validity/evidence base | Evidence: “I feel there has to be overwhelming evidence of the benefits in using it and also some kind of reassurance in the evidence that using the i.v. component wasn’t going to have a negative impact in terms of development of resistance” [49] Awareness: “I think there is certainly plenty of evidence there that some of us should be looking at and I think the big problem is . .not everybody has fully appraised the papers” [49] |
Safety/legal/ethical concerns | Safety: “Sometimes I feel a little bit worried that, have I given them the right advice. . . the right advice I should be giving them” (Allied Health professional) [47] Responsibility: “I would not have so much responsibility. Any complications would be the responsibility of the doctor”(Traditional midwife) [41] Ethics: “I don’t like having my name attached to it in some way by endorsing it. By giving it to the patient I’m endorsing its content …. That makes me feel uncomfortable” [53] Liability: “I think that is a part of our culture, when people feel very protective and somewhat defensive because they are concerned about sitting on a witness stand, or being sued, or having some risk” [44] |
Supportive components | Training: “We are getting new doctors especially interns every time. Updating when new information arises or when changing protocols happens is very important for proper care of patients. (Nurse)” [5] Repetition: “It’s not just the education getting them past the bad habits, you have to keep going back and back and repeating and then they get into a rhythm . . . they need constant reinforcement” [44] Professional support: “We don’t receive clinical supervision at all and when you call them after months and try to recollect the child’s death… it would give me strength to provide more phone calls and to invest in this program” [40] Audit and feedback: “Anytime you’re monitoring something, compliance is better . . . everyone is willing to change…it’s just a habit and habits are hard to break” [44] Evidence of outcomes: “Someone needs to show that this will actually lead to not necessarily a substantial increase in referrals to the high end of the services, but actually a better utilization of those resources.” (Nurse) [6] End user involvement:“…people need to feel that this is an important priority, that they’re involved in shaping it, localizing it, customizing it, that it reflects what they can do and achieve, that they’re supported in it”(Psychiatrist) [6] |